Saturday, August 13, 2011

Profiles in Academic Myopia: Michael Olivas, “Professor” at the University of Houston Law Center


In response to one tenured colleague’s noting that “law professors” are over-paid, and do not produce graduates who are ready for the practice of law, Michael Olivas, answered with a moronic argument that a Thomas M. Cooley grad could see through. Would you expect anything less from a pompous windbag with the long-winded, ridiculous title of “William B. Bates Distinguished Chair of Law” and “Director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance” at the University of Houston?!?!

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/08/09/tenured_law_professor_aims_to_expose_the_excesses_of_his_profession

“Michael A. Olivas, a law professor at the University of Houston who is president of the Association of American Law Schools (but who stressed that he was speaking for himself, not the organization), said that LawProf is welcome to return half of his salary if he is guilt-ridden.
Olivas said that "there is a small grain of truth in most of what he says," but that his portrayal of law professors is unfair and inaccurate. Olivas said that good law professors prepare for every meeting of every course, paying attention to changes in the law. He said that they routinely help not only current students, but alumni. And he said legal scholarship is valuable to academe and society. "It's unprincipled to walk into class unprepared," he said. "I would never do that. Most people would never do that."


Hello, Stupid Bitch. Are you aware that one instructor foregoing half of his salary would represent a drop in the bucket?!?! This certainly would not lead to systemic change in American “legal education.” By the way, such a noble move would result in that money going back into the particular law school’s coffers. What the hell would be served, by doing that?

Also, how many changes in “the law” have occurred in the last 25 years, in fields such as property or contracts?! Even in areas such as constitutional law, criminal procedure and torts, there are not a myriad of changes to justify the salary of “law professors” who essentially dust off their old notes, order a supplement to the main casebook, and come to class. Then again, what would one expect from an industry goon and apologist dog?! One wonder if Olivas the Dog turns away from his own vomit.

http://www.texastribune.org/library/data/government-employee-salaries/university-of-houston-system/michael-a-olivas/682212/

As the author of Inside the Law School Scam noted in this entry, Michael Olivas - and his ratty-ass beard - made $169,646 in base salary, from the University of Houston, last year. In the same entry, LawProf punches Olivas in the snout:

“Michael Olivas, the current president of the American Association of Law Schools (basically the trade association for ABA-accredited schools), makes a really bad argument when he suggests I return half my salary if I'm so guilt-ridden. This reminds me of the argument that people who have an AGI of over $250K and who support the repeal of the Bush tax cuts for those in their income category should simply write a bigger check explanation as to why this is a ridiculous argument you probably shouldn't be reading this blog, although apparently you're qualified to be president of the AALS).” [Emphasis mine]

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings/page+3

By the way, US “News” & World Report lists the University of Houston Law Center as the 56th greatest, most triumphant and exhilarating law school, in the nation. According to The Texas Tribune, Olivas was hired on September 1, 1982. No wonder this Ivory Tower denizen is so keen on preserving the status quo. Do you think this academic would make it in private industry or a law firm?!

http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/grad-debt-rankings/page+7

Furthermore, USN&WR notes that the average student indebtedness of University of Houston Law Center grads - from the Class of 2010 - who incurred law school debt stood at a robust $65,802. Make sure to thank Texas taxpayers for subsidizing tuition, and for providing your salary for the past 29 years, Michael. By the way, 82% of this commode’s 2010 graduating class took on such debt, for their “legal education.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOKysX3ikpQ

Check out this long-winded ass-clown’s presentation. Who knew that Amerigo Vespucci discovered and developed a time machine, and warped into the future? In any event, you can see this pretentious academic "Welcome everyone" in Spanish - as keynote speaker at June 12, 2011 commencement for the UC-Riverside Graduate School of Education. For future reference, when you travel across the country to present a speech to a group of people, i.e. Houston to Riverside, CA, YOU don't welcome THEM.

At the 3:50 mark, Michael "Porky" Olivas talks about the changes in the world of "higher education." He notes that he graduated from college in 1972. For $ome rea$on, the bearded swine does not mention the following topics: SKYROCKETING tuition; the corporatization of American universities and colleges; the shrinking job market; or the fundementally different U.S. and global economies. Instead, he focuses on abject concepts such as "the collegiate conscience," "the loss of innocence" and social justice issues of the past. Guess what, tool?! College and university administrators do not have a conscience - or moral compass. Unless, of course, you consider the following as moral: their focus on increasing enrollment, charging higher tuition, financing wasteful capital improvements, bloating the ranks of administration further, and naming "professorships" and campus buildings after rich, white guys and corporate entities.

In the last analysis, Michael Olivas is divorced from reality. He sees the world through the lens of one who has been in the safe confines of academia, for the last 29 years. Keep in mind that he has spent about 25 years in educational settings as student, prior to this period. You can see the results. Olivas is someone who does not understand the changing American economy, the shrinking U.S. lawyer job market, or the long-term effect that MASSIVE amounts of NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt have on recent graduates and their families. Imagine how much debt Olivas incurred to earn his BA, MA, PhD and JD, in comparison to the current generation.

108 comments:

  1. It is horrific to watch a law professor claw to preserve thier little bit of the law school scam. It hurts even more to watch Nando slice and dice like a cuisinart food processor a William B. Bates Distinguished Chair of Law” and “Director of the Institute of Higher Education Law & Governance.”

    ReplyDelete
  2. Let's get rid of of the loans that pay for these hard earned "salaries."

    ReplyDelete
  3. These "professors" are a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 7:36, it's kind of cool to watch Nando incinerate these professors. It's a guilty pleasure of mine.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You can see here his exhausting schedule from May 2011 to May 2012 is teaching one class.

    http://www.law.uh.edu/schedule/homepage.html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Here I am on a Saturday in the office taking a little break visiting your blog. I was expecting to see the usual picture of dung inside a toilet but honestly, nothing prepared my shock in seeing a picture of a butt-ugly, thugged out, hippie boomer freak. I was literally taken back and even yelped out "WTF!" when I saw Olivas.

    But I digress. While I am not a fan of Rush Limbaugh, my co-worker listens to him on occasion and he was commenting on the blogger movement on his show the other day. I was surprised to hear that Rush was very supportive of the scam bloggers. Even more surprised to hear that Rush was very sympathetic to recent grads who are severely in debt and have little job prospects. Rush went on to state that he strongly feels that higher education in the US was designed by the Democrats and Socialists to enslave the American people and intentionally put people in debt. While I am not sure if I agree with Rush if Socialism is behind higher education scam, I do have to agree that the Democratic Party does seem to receive a huge kick back from colleges and universities when the Fed became heavily involved in issuing student loans. Nonetheless, it was pretty interesting to hear Talk Radio even commenting on the scam-bloggers.

    Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://daisnaid9.blogspot.com/2011/08/profiles-in-cowardice-and-stupidity.html

    Check out turde’s biting article on the beacons of integrity known as U.S. "law professors." They agree with the concept of "free speech" - until you disagree with these pigs. Go to the comments section of this post:

    http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2011/08/i-am-lawprof.html#comments

    As you can see, some pussy's wife felt the need to come to his aid, on August 12, 2011 12:42:11 pm. That is beyond pathetic! Kelly Horwitz, would you give your husband his little balls back? Thanks. (Lord knows that Paul wouldn't dare ask you to return them.) On second thought, you may want to demand that your wife hand your beanbag back to you, before you end up as the next subject on TTR.

    These gluttonous swine are seething because a true professor had the spine to start his own scam-blog. How dare a fellow professor inform the masses, about the business known as "legal education."

    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/08/09/tenured_law_professor_aims_to_expose_the_excesses_of_his_profession

    Read the comments, by the academic cockroaches. They resort to ad hominem attacks, because LawProf chose to write his blog under a pseudonym, i.e. catty comments along the lines of “He’s a coward” or “Wait for his tell-all book to come out.” (By the way, most of these ass-hats did not catch the irony of referring to an anonymous blogger as “a coward” - while they hide safely behind the veil of anonymity.) You can tell that these bitches want to know LawProf’s identity. And you foul hags wonder why a tenured professor chose to write, under an internet handle.

    http://qfora.com/jdu/thread.php?threadId=19673

    JDU posters are commenting on the fact that you are pussies who cannot handle any internal disagreement. So much for your professed love of the exchange of ideas and viewpoints.

    Keep in mind that the vast majority of tenured “law professors” in this nation did not practice law for any considerable length of time. Hence, they cannot understand the importance of preparing others to practice law. Furthermore, they do not know how to do so. Would you hire a bunch of retired cab drivers to teach people how to play the piano? Who would hire a cohort of such people as head football coaches, in college or the NFL? Sure, some of them may have some limited experience doing so, i.e. taking piano lessons as a kid or coaching Pop Warner youth football. However, they will be hard-pressed to teach others what they themselves have not done.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What the fuck? Tommy Chong's been teaching law all these years?

    ReplyDelete
  9. ^ A John Rhys-Davies reference would work, too...

    ReplyDelete
  10. @10:07AM

    A few weeks ago, or maybe a little longer, I reached out to Ann Coulter by posting a comment on her chat room about TTR, Cryn's blog (All Education Matters) and also Alan Collinges site: Studentloanjustice.org.

    I referred Ann Coulter to the blogs, because I felt she should have a look, since she is a Lawyer, and from a top school.

    Conservative yes, but a lawyer all the same.

    I know I goof around a lot with a lot of wild antics for attention, and I don't care if people love me or hate me, or feel nothing.

    I had a very good teacher in Howard Stern and his methods, and from observing the reaction Stern got, and Stern's popularity with working class people over the years.

    But let's face it: If I came off as a businessman or with a dull legal monotone, no one would pay attention.

    I also sent a letter to Sean Hannity, referring him to the same blogs, including my own.

    The Internet is a powerful tool, and I do shamelessly troll around the internet trying to draw attention to the scambloggers and to AEM and Studentloanjustice.org I wrote to Katie Couric, Maria Shriver, Howard Stern, and also to Ron Jeremy the Porn star about my Marylin Chambers poem.

    Anyone that knows people who know people who know people in other words.

    And BTW, I recall Professors from Law School that are "Liberal" as Rush, or Sean Hannity would define them.

    And lately I am questioning the very premise of Government involvement in Higher Ed in the first place. Sort of like it is Tax and spend Liberalism come full cycle after 2 or 3 decades, with disastrous results, and ruined, indebted lives in its wake.

    I cannot say I have much hope for either a Liberal or Conservative solution to the Student Debt Crisis, but through it all, I do have a soft spot in my heart for Ann Coulter, where her name is etched in Gold (Sigh!)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Especially stupid in the comments of the Prawfs blog were the ones made by Orin Kerr (who is supposedly the best the brightest in criminal law). The prof. asks whether biglaw salaries (which are oh so common) are also a scam, as if they some how justify prof. salaries. Just another apologist schill

    ReplyDelete
  12. What's really interesting about the Prawfs blog article is when the author comments that all of this could become moot if the economy picks up. Of course, he doesn't even address the fact that this would not benefit anybody who has already graduated, because the firms will just go get the most recent crop of graduated 3L's.

    When I go to talk to professors, they always ask me what area of law I want to practice. I like to make them uncomfortable by saying that I just hope that there are jobs when I graduate. Of course, they tell me things will pick up. They'd better hope so, otherwise they'll be in the same boat as their students.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Jesus Christ! That hideous, bloodsucking monster needs to be killed with fire.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There's one outstanding comment - the last one on the page by Jack White. No one has countered his points:

    I'm not sure why this you profs aren't getting it. I'm not trying to get personal, so I'm just going to explain to you how non-T14 law schools (and even some T14 nowadays) look from the outside.

    1. Naive early 20's kids with liberal arts degrees and little concept of the real world go to law school. They are lured in by borderline fraudulent employment statistics.
    2. Having been told all their lives that "education is priceless" and having almost no financial experience they borrow six figure sums for school (which has risen in cost faster than inflation for decades).
    3. They work themselves to the bone, giving up a good part of their youth for the prospect to join the profession which they have been told is necessary, noble, and valued.
    4. A lucky few get into BigLaw and are able to pay their debts. (Albeit while working in miserable conditions and usually being discarded after a few years.)
    5. The rest scramble to get a job with a starting salary that is a small fraction of what they owe.
    6. They don't pay their debts on time and so penalty fees and interest pile up. Their credit is ruined forever as these debts (unlike virtually all others) cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. They can't buy houses, cars, rent a decent apartment, or ever have a family. They are basically lifelong failures at the age of 26. (There are a few ways out, but they are pretty drastic).
    7. Their loans, being guaranteed by the government, are paid for by the taxpayers, who have just paid gobs of money for basically nothing. (This even happens with IBR.)
    8. Law Professors live an upper middle class lifestyles built on the misery of their former students and the fleecing of the American taxpayer. (Some people in Administration live just as well, so I guess you guys aren't the only ones). Their work in the meantime is neither practically useful nor theoretically groundbreaking (according to LawProf).

    If something else is going on here you'd better speak up with something better than this posting's attempt to muddy the waters. It just looks like evasion. At best you look like the Mafia Wives of Academia, looking the other way while the administration hurts people for your money. You are far along in the process of creating a generation that is incredibly cynical and will try to smash your ivory tower if they get the chance.

    Since you seem to very much be interested in the circumstances of those who criticize you I'll give you a picture. Basically I went a top 50 LS and realized I didn't want to be a lawyer. I dropped out after 1L. It was the best decision I ever made. When I see some of my former classmates I get something like survivor's guilt as I have an okay job and a manageable debt load. One of my former classmates told me that his life was just a miserable wait to die. I'm not sure you truly grasp the desperation of some of your former students.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Once again, for the 249 millionth time, law professors like Olivas demonstrate they are hypocritical scumbags. They are so used to being blown by sycophantic students that they go to pieces when confronted with an opposing viewpoint.

    "What?! How dare that cretin argue with me? I am published in the Spring 2002 edition of the Saskatchewan law journal!"

    ReplyDelete
  16. $160K/yr. for what exactly? I learned more law in my seven-week bar review course than in three years of dreadful classes.

    They say: it is the Socratic method, we train your minds, teach you to spot issues, ect. ect.

    Well, guess what, Law School professors. Bright and successful college graduates, holding degrees in the liberal arts and social sciences, are fully able to read a text critically, extract and apply the principles to a hypothetical, and identify logical flaws. The skills that you purport to bestow have long since been mastered by your students. Quit wasting your students' time with useless head games and teach them how to practice law.

    I will admit that some small fraction of legal scholarship is useful to society, but it should not be done on the student's dime. Law Reviews should be funded by government and foundation grants.

    Law school should be a two-year program. Year One should be a bar-review type course to teach the basics fast, plus classes in legal research in writing. Year Two should be devoted to clinicals and externships, supervised by successful local practitioners, to teach students how to run an office, do circuit court gruntwork, try a case, and write an appeal. Under this cost-effective model of legal education, there would really be no need for law professors at all.

    ReplyDelete
  17. One small disagreement with this most excellent post though. Olivas would be well-advised to keep the ratty-ass beard. It makes him look like a rabbi or an iman. Without it, people would mistake his fat, bald, oval head for a bowling ball.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Re: Professor Olivas. His protestations are disapppointing and entirely self serving. A quick glance at his CV suggests he earned his JD at night while working full time in policy positions at NGOs in Washington, DC. While this is to be respected, the notion that he deserves a high salary simply because he "could" work in private practice is preposterous. Any casual observer of legal hiring knows that he would have had a hard time making it in "big law." In fact, as a part-time JD candidate with a full time job, he may not have even gotten a chance to work as a summer associate in "big law", let alone make partner. Even if he had been hired in big law as an associate at the start of his career, it is unlikley that somone with his disheveled visage and wild, unkempt beard would make partner. He should quit while he's ahead, stop digging a deeper hole and be thankful he has such a nice lifestyle.

    There is one more thing about Olivas' CV that stands out - his service from 1992 to 1998 as a trustee of "The Access Group." This is a blatant conflict of interest and demonstrates that Olivas directly benefitted - personally and professionally - from the "law school scam." The Access Group, headed by New York Law School's very own Richard Matasar, is one of the biggest pimps of private student loans for law students. While ostensibly a "non-profit", Access Group has benefitted handsomely from the proliferation of law schools and the concurrent rise in tuition. The Access Group, with its nearly 8% interest rates, has shackled a generation to soul-crushing and non-dischargeable student loan debt.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Not only does Olivas look like Amerigo Vespucci, but he also looks like the actor who plays Galileo on History Channel reenactments.

    ReplyDelete
  21. nando, take the bar much?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Grassley just won't go away:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/business/127668488.html

    http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202510863436&ABAs_stance_on_law_school_accreditation_transparency_fails_to_satisfy_senator&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

    http://grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=36358

    And here is ".pdf" of his second letter:

    http://grassley.senate.gov/about/upload/2011-08-08-CEG-to-ABA-letter-2-2-4.pdf

    =======

    I hope everyone sends him a short "thank you."

    ReplyDelete
  23. Just to follow up on my comment from last night:

    One thing I must say about Conservative talk radio: Rush and Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin (A Lawyer I believe) are accessible, and actually do talk to the people that call in, and are willing to talk to Conservatives and Liberals as well.

    Granted there is a call screener, such as Mr. Snurdley (On the Rush program) and probably a long wait to get through.

    And even Ann Coulter makes the effort to actually go to College campuses and talk to the students and people there.

    I do not find Liberal talk radio, so to speak, to be the same. It seems like if one listens to NPR, they talk "at" you, and not "to" you, or almost "down" to you. Garrison Keillor, for instance, sounds so pompous and highbrow.

    In fact, I bet that if Nando or Cryn called in to the Rush or Sean Hannity, or Mark Levin radio show, they would get through and be able to talk on the air.

    I say all this after many years of listening to these programs while doing my painting work.

    Whether you like Conservative talk radio or not, they do listen and engage, and most often only kick someone off the air if they cannot or will not reasonably discuss the issues.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Harvard Law professor Duncan Kennedy wrote 30 years ago what a scam law school is:

    Professor Kennedy writes that not only do law schools not teach you how to practice law, they destroy your self confidence, teach you risk aversion, teach a negative attitude,and teach subservience.

    Prof. Kennedy writes that don't teach,and mystify, actual law practice which is often not that complicated. The law grad then goes to a law firm where he is intimidated and terrified by the partners, who frankly aren't that impressive. It teaches a silly snobbishess that looks down on entrepreneurial lawyers, and keeps young lawyers chained at their desks and subservient to their law firm employers.

    So not only does law school teach nothing, in inculcates a defeatist negative attitude in students and gives them no greater ambition that to be permanent employees of other lawyers.

    Professor Kennedy's article is worth reading:
    http://duncankennedy.net/documents/Photo%20articles/Legal%20Education%20and%20the%20Reproduction%20of%20Hierarchy_J.%20Leg.%20Ed..pdf

    ReplyDelete
  25. Painter,

    This isn't the Rush Limbaugh Show. This blog isn't about Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or other conservative talk show crap. Rather, this blog is about the legal scam blog movement. Please stay on topic if you plan to post. Keep this crap on your own blog. Thank you for your cooperation.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @Wise Ass 9:26:

    You do realize once you take the bar and become licensed to practice law, when you go to interviews, the law firm or company can easily go to the State Bar site and look-up when you became licensed, and when you renewed your license. If there are no jobs out there and you do not have enough of money to open your own law office and hang a damn shingle so to speak (which is actually is a lot harder to pull off these days with the over whelming number of attorneys and recent grads), it does not look all that for the potential candidate if they are licensed, but have not practiced law for some time. It's an unforgiving market and unfortunately most hiring managers still use the Six Month Rule (meaning if a candidate is out of work longer than six months) to determine if a candidate is worthy of an interview.

    You probably some punk ass 0L or 1L to make a comment like that. You'll learn soon enough how hard and unforgiving it is out there once you graduate.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 10:56: eh...actually Painter is on topic. Poster 10:07AM on 8/13 posted he over-heard Rush Limbaugh mentioning outrageous salaries higher academia earns at the expense of students and the scam blog movement.

    It's great that some of mainstream media and now conservative talk radio are picking up on this problem.

    ReplyDelete
  28. There is a simple issue here that clarifies why the academic focus of law school is useless and misplaced. People go into law school, mostly, with the idea that they will become lawyers or will use their legal education to get jobs outside academia when they graduate. My guess is that this is how medical school and dental school also work. Probably this is the sort of idea that students in MBA programs have - get degree, get job or better job in related field.

    This leads to a simple question - why does law school need to be focused on abstract theorizing and "Law and" BS, and needless "hide the ball" Socratic wanking, with professors cranking out articles with titles like "Rethinking Thought: Thoughts About the Rethinking of the Neorealist Critique of Realist Theory in Post-Lochner Jurisprudence?"

    You can easily graduate law school having no idea where or how to file a complaint, how to charge a client for services, what to do in court, or anything else lawyers need to know. I would have a hard time imagining that medical school students graduate without knowing how to read an EKG or an X-ray, what blood pressure means, what commonly prescribed drugs do, or how to suture a wound. If doctors were trained like lawyers, they would not know any of these things.

    So here's my idea - if law school wants to be an abstract, academic thing - fine. Just divorce law school from bar passage and make law schools into departments like sociology and anthropology and linguistics in the universities where they are. Then the law professors can theorize and Socratize away. That way the incoming students will get what they should expect to get - an abstract, theoretical education with limited value outside of academia.

    Create two year vocational programs for people who want to be lawyers, with none of the Socratic BS or the academic wanking. That way the students' needs will be met more efficiently, and the law professors can try to make a living in academia without the benefit of thousands of lemmings taking out loans for a minimally useful education.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I realize of course that daytime Conservative Talk Radio would not be listened to on a regular basis by people, such as lawyers, who are preoccupied all day long, or by people that work in offices in general.

    Maybe, in that sense, I am lucky to have been working a job that keeps my hands occcupied, but my ears and mind free to listen in on 3 hours of Rush, and then 3 hours of Hannity, and some of Mark Levin before leaving work and going home for dinner etc.

    I have had some exposure to Glenn Beck, but not all that much to be able to give a "take" on Beck's overall message.

    However, I do remember Glenn Beck saying something negative on the radio about Student Loans. It might have been as long as two years ago.

    Also, I have had limited exposure to Bill O'Reilly. But I do remember an interview between Bill O'Reilly and NPR's Terry Gross from a few years back that was withering.

    O'Reilly was quite angry at Gross for her line of questioning as I recall, and even terminated the interview.

    I think there was a follow up interview between O'Reilly and Gross that was more amicable.

    Now, there is also Conservative Monica Crowley on Saturdays (on Radio) but I have only heard her once in a while, as I listen to the Irish music every Saturday from 9AM to 1PM.

    I know nothing about Drudge, and a smattering about Michael Savage, given my schedule etc.

    But, and as they say on Conservative Talk radio, there is no real Talk Radio equivalent in the "Liberal" world on the radio, except for NPR. If there is, I don't know about it,
    and NPR does not really take callers to the extent that Conservative Talk Radio does.

    So much of my understanding of what "Liberalism" is comes from the way that it is defined, in the negative, by Conservative Talk Radio.

    BTW, I have, on a number of occassions heard a student from a Univeristy or College call in and complain to either Rush or Hannity about how that student had a Professor that was "Liberal"

    And Rush or Hannity would give a critique/response.

    To conclude: Why do I listen to Conservative Talk Radio in the First place?

    Well, I cannot stand the same old Rock that I grew up on, and have been listening to for 30 plus years.

    And I cannot identify with most Pop music anymore, old or modern.

    Maybe because I am getting older.

    So the only other real choice is Talk Radio on the AM bands.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hello this is Howard Stern WnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNBC!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Shockingly, the folks over at Law Prawfs posted a follow up to the original post on the anonymous Law Prof, and comments weren't permitted. Again, SHOCKING.

    Mr. Horwitz, by the way, has the gall to suggest that law schools discuss the legal market, the struggles & misery of its graduates, etc., at their orientation weeks. Orientation week comes, of course, after students have already paid their first semester's tuition, often moved to a different state, signed a yearlong lease, etc. Only then should law schools discuss the pitfalls of the "investment" these students are making. Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  32. http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2011/08/last-thoughts-on-lawprof.html#comments

    ReplyDelete
  33. Are you done Painter? You idiot. Recall the posts of others where they say they don't care to have to scroll through all your bullshit. Did it really require 63 lines to essentially say absolutely nothing of relevance? Like I've said - I'm not surprised you failed the bar as many times as you have - it takes you forever to get to the point - if indeed you ever do get to a point. This isn't a political blog for tea baggers (such as yourself) either. Bottom line is we don't care about your political, philosophical, Ann Coulter obsession, blah, blah, blah. Keep your stupid stories and other bullshit on YOUR blog, not here!

    ReplyDelete
  34. I realize of course that daytime Conservative Talk Radio would not be listened to on a regular basis by people, such as lawyers, who are preoccupied all day long, or by people that work in offices in general. [WHO CARES]

    Maybe, in that sense, I am lucky to have been working a job that keeps my hands occcupied, but my ears and mind free to listen in on 3 hours of Rush, and then 3 hours of Hannity, and some of Mark Levin before leaving work and going home for dinner etc. [NOT RELEVANT]

    I have had some exposure to Glenn Beck, but not all that much to be able to give a "take" on Beck's overall message. [NOT RELEVANT]

    However, I do remember Glenn Beck saying something negative on the radio about Student Loans. It might have been as long as two years ago. [MARGINALLY RELEVANT]

    Also, I have had limited exposure to Bill O'Reilly. But I do remember an interview between Bill O'Reilly and NPR's Terry Gross from a few years back that was withering. [NOT RELEVANT]

    O'Reilly was quite angry at Gross for her line of questioning as I recall, and even terminated the interview. [NOT RELEVANT]

    I think there was a follow up interview between O'Reilly and Gross that was more amicable. [NOT RELEVANT]

    Now, there is also Conservative Monica Crowley on Saturdays (on Radio) but I have only heard her once in a while, as I listen to the Irish music every Saturday from 9AM to 1PM. [NOT RELEVANT - WHO GIVES A FUCK ABOUT IRISH MUSIC]

    I know nothing about Drudge, and a smattering about Michael Savage, given my schedule etc. [NOT RELEVANT]

    But, and as they say on Conservative Talk radio, there is no real Talk Radio equivalent in the "Liberal" world on the radio, except for NPR. If there is, I don't know about it,
    and NPR does not really take callers to the extent that Conservative Talk Radio does. [NOT RELEVANT]

    So much of my understanding of what "Liberalism" is comes from the way that it is defined, in the negative, by Conservative Talk Radio. [NOT RELEVANT]

    BTW, I have, on a number of occassions heard a student from a Univeristy or College call in and complain to either Rush or Hannity about how that student had a Professor that was "Liberal" [NOT RELEVANT]

    And Rush or Hannity would give a critique/response. [NOT RELEVANT]

    To conclude: Why do I listen to Conservative Talk Radio in the First place? [NOT RELEVANT]

    Well, I cannot stand the same old Rock that I grew up on, and have been listening to for 30 plus years. [NOT RELEVANT]

    And I cannot identify with most Pop music anymore, old or modern. [NOT RELEVANT]

    Maybe because I am getting older. [YEAH WE KNOW - YOU'RE A FUCKING GEEZER]

    So the only other real choice is Talk Radio on the AM bands. [NOT RELEVANT]

    ReplyDelete
  35. Hello this is Howard Stern WnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNBC!!!

    ReplyDelete
  36. ^ Obviously a post by Painter since I have no idea what it means. Some obscure reference to Howard Stern; some cryptic statement that only has meaning within the warped mind of JD Painter.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I can't wait for the day when school teachers are respected and these asshats are hated.

    ReplyDelete
  38. NANDO check this out, New York Law School students suing the school.
    http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Law_Students_Sue_New_York-127640498.html

    Burning down the house, let it burn baby. Let it burn...

    ReplyDelete
  39. You had me at "Hello, Stupid Bitch."

    Further, perhaps someone can explain why a man making $160k+ per year while living in cheap-ass Texas can't afford a box of Crest Whitestrips.

    ReplyDelete
  40. And, to be sure, the decades he has spent in cushy academia should have allowed him ample savings in terms at least being presentable. How hard is it to look at least presentable six hours or so a week? Being a law "professor" he is likely in his bathrobe 30+ hours a week. Typical career academician. They have it good and KNNOW it. He can afford to look like that because, well, he doesn't have a real job at all.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I had a law professor who used to show up to lecture in his goddamn sweatpants. I kid you not. This guy was a complete asshole, thought he was above it all.

    ReplyDelete
  42. @ August 14, 7:37PM:

    FYI I was not August 14 @ 7:55 (Nando can back me up on that)

    Let's face it, you just don't like me, and anything I say will be called shit by you.

    But you are wrong when you say that Conservative Talk Radio is not relevant. Dead wrong.

    There is an election comng up in 2012, and Both Parties are going to have to take a position on the Student Loan Debt Issue.

    Rush Limbaugh has given it a few words already, and most likely will give some more in the upcoming election season.

    But you are way, way, way out of line telling me what to post on Nando's blog.

    You are not Nando, and you don't own Nando's blog. And you are really a first class creep for coming to my blog and telling me to stop posting on Nando's blog.

    And don't you dare, ever, EVER! mention Ann Coulter in a derogatory way to me again.

    Leave her out of it. You dull, creepin, crawly creepy creep.

    YOU CREEP!

    YOU CREEEEEEEEEEEP! And we older folks laugh point blank and with bad breath right into your young and really dumb faces as we watch you take yoru first tottering steps into the big bad world, and then look up at the elders with a really stupid, shit eating grin.

    You'll learn kid.

    Oh! How you will learn.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Nando- new article in fox news:
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/15/law-school-grads-finding-work-harder-than-passing-bar/

    JDP- that kid's obsession with you is getting downright creepy. I agree with you, coverage of this by anybody, conservative or liberal is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Speaking of Rush Limbaugh, he mentioned about the suit against NYLS on today's show (my co-worker streams Limbaugh's show).

    I know some may dislike Conservative Talk Radio, but the reality is millions in this country listen to Rush, Sean Hannity, and Lou Dobbs. This is pretty major that Talk Radio is discussing this problem. Who knows that a majority of listeners are parents and may dissuade their kids in going to 3T and unranked law schools.

    ReplyDelete
  45. @ 4:10

    Again, I have been listening to Rush and Hannity, and some of Mark Levin (A Lawyer) through 2 past Presidential elections, and thru about 4 mid-term elections.

    Let's face it, Talk Radio is very influential.
    If some of their people follow TTR and the bloggers on TTR's list or roll, it is a step in the right direction.

    One may be Liberal or Conservative, but both will have to discuss the issues.

    I was listenign to Rush today, but I missed his mention of the suit against NYLS.

    I had Hannity on, but was both near and far from the radio, and so missed Hannity's program today.

    But like I say, Rush and Hannity do take lots of calls and do bother to talk to people of all sorts, young and old.

    I just do not see NPR as doing that.

    It is like NPR wants to "teach" or talk down to, rather than discuss or persuade.

    That is the difference.

    And lately, in light of SL debt, I wonder if most "Teachers" at most levels (Liberal I guess) just want to keep the taxpayer dollars pouring in, and want to keep selling education as a Gov't sponsored source of income.

    It is like an odd mirror image of Thomas Hardy's novel: Jude The Obscure

    Jude Fawley had scholarly ambitions, but not the financial means to get into a fictitious Oxford in order to pursue them, and so Jude's ambitions were thwarted.

    Today, the money is there in the form of Government backed loans, but the result is the same in a lot of cases: Educational/Scholarly Ambition is thwarted with debt later on.

    A strange situation.

    And in the meantime the overall population or society has been dummed down in a savage pop culture.

    ReplyDelete
  46. @ JDPainter

    1) I am impressed by the Jude the Obscure reference. The idea that law school is not unlike Jude the Obscure in reverse had never occured to me, but it makes sense. At least Jude the Obscure ended on a positive, cheery note, just like how things end for debt-ridden law students.

    2) The references to talk radio are not entirely misplaced here. Scamblogging is interesting because its supporters and detractors seem to span the range from left to middle to right. The right seems to be against government money being transferred through students to universities for education of questionable value. The left seems to be against the establishment ripping people off based upon cooked data and false promises. The middle seems to be against people being stuck in more debt that they cant get out of.

    The law school apologists on the right seem to take the tack that law debt is an issue of personal responsibility and caveat emptor. The left-wing apologists seem to think that education is always valuable no matter the cost of it. The great middle assumes that all lawyers should be rich, because all lawyers are rich.

    What law school debt and educational debt in general could do is create an issue that cuts across party lines. Most reasonable people, regardless of party affiliation, can agree that something is wrong with a system where a 24 year old can leave school 200k in non-dischargeable debt with no real job prospects. Someone in that situation has little to no hope in life before they even get started. That kind of debt cannot be assuaged by positive thinking or cliches about personal responsibility. It really, seriously, actually ruins many peoples' lives. What greater societal interest is served by this sort of debt slavery? We are going to lose a lot of bright young people to student debt if we are not careful. If this isn't an issue worth the attention of our political leadership, I don't know what is.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Creepy Crawly Creep here. Smell my anal vapors - all of ya. Pop a boner while yer at it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. @5:45-completely agree and spot on.

    As a mother of a bright nine year old boy, I sometime lose sleep thinking about tuition. I am already forking over thousands to provide my son with extra tutoring and course because frankly, you just don't receive a hard core education in school anymore. By all means, I am not blaming the teachers. Many of the teachers in my son's elementary school do care about the students, however since the enactment of No Child Left Behind, elementary school teachers are placed on an intense schedule of criteria they have to teach, regardless if some students comprehend it or not. Because of cut backs in the school district with art and foreign language, yours truly is sending her kid to Spanish lessons and art classes every week. I do not mind spending money on my son and I do understand that a teacher has 29 other kids in class to teach. However what gets me is that my taxes are always increased where I live (which is NY), but our school district is always in financial distress. And I do not fault the teachers. I put blame it on unions reps in force holding politicians to a vote, as well as the politicians who cannot grasp accounting and economics when doing budgets and financial forecasting.

    I strongly feel that this country has it all wrong when it comes to education. The money should be better spent on early child hood and elementary education. Have the high schools provide classes in Literature, History, Philosophy, and Poli Sci. Why should these subjects have full, blown out majors in undergrad when a majority of those studying Literature, History, and Philosophy have no real plans in becoming a teacher? Why should some school sock it to some kid and charge them $30K per year for a subject in which could have been taught or offered in high school instead? How does a bachelor degree in humanities translate that someone can perform XYZ when hired, especially in a shrinking work-force? It’s bad enough people with OTJ experience cannot market themselves a job with competitive salary. These professors and deans deep down know this, however they are not helping these kids out while they are at school and especially after they graduate.

    I also strongly feel that because since there are so many damn colleges now in the US, ranking has become necessary, which should not have been the case. I’m fine with the existence of 2T UGC’s which provide business degrees and other degrees which can transition well into the work force. I do understand the existence of these schools and the benefit for those who are average to above average students who want to continue their education. Not everyone can afford or get accepted into Harvard, MIT, NYU, etc. and not everyone wants to go to Harvard, NYU, etc. However the creation of "non-elitists" schools has done quite the opposite: it only reinforced that the Ivy League and T50's are the only schools that matter and have the reputation in providing a good education (which is highly debatable to begin with). Most troubling is that these unranked and low-ranked schools charge just as much as T50’s and that’s egregious.

    Apologies for the long post.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I would say about at least 40,000 lost souls will be embarking on the fool's errand known as law school in the next few days. In addition to the pervasive employment woes for attorneys, these lemmings have to look forward to the public's scorn as the "profession" has lost all vestiges of prestige. The only people that refer to the legal profession as noble, just or prestigious are the academic hacks who blood suck on your tuition loan dollars. Don't believe me about the scorn? Take a gander at the vicious comments section in the fox news article cited supra. The comments are from laypersons who are happy to see lawyers suffering. There is even one 2L who was advised to drop out but unfortunately this rube is unfamiliar with the concept of sunk costs. 40,000 lost souls. Fucking unbelievable that the academic cartel of charlatans get to pull this rip-off operation year after year.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Smell my anal vapors lemmings.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I graduated from a 4th tier trash can in 2008, and have yet to find full-time legal employment. I am 230,000 dollars in total debt if you include undergrad. I live with my parents, whose mediocre incomes cannot help to pay the debt. I have sporadically worked as a temp, but have yet to have any work in over a year. I currently live with my parents, am clinically depressed, and on a steady supply of zoloft and valium. Going to law school ruined my life as I will never be able to buy a house or start a family. Over the past few months I have developed into a raging alcoholic, and have twice been institutionalized. One was during a drunken rage in which I stripped completely naked, covered myself in my own feces, and ran around my neighborhood. That was by far my worst outburst, and I have since been relatively stable even though I continue to drink cheap vodka all day everyday. Most nights, I cry myself to sleep, because my life is ruined. All you potential law students should read my cautionary tale, and think twice about attending law school. It turned my to an insane drunk, with no romantic prospects, who lives with his parents.

    ReplyDelete
  52. If Limbaugh and his fellow scary-right faux-populist talk show haters ever take up our cause of student debt and overpaid professors, then it will be a devil's embrace. Because those guys would replace our dysfunctional educational system with something even worse. They would probably seek to turn the public schools over to for-profit corporate management.

    ReplyDelete
  53. @ 8:03 As someone who passed on law school and instead works with attorneys for most of my career, there is a reason why people loath attorneys so much. I have found in the past ten years, newly minted attorneys just cannot communicate well. They are taken back when questioned why certain things are handled, or performed, in which the client has every right to ask those questions. They also cannot manage, nor delegate, and many lack organizational skills making it difficult for them to run their own show, miss deadlines, and appointments. Some attorneys will actually make their support staff's life a living hell.

    It's not the money so much that attorneys are presumed in making that people are pissed off about so much. It's the attitude that unfortunately many attorneys possess which puts people off. Just attend a trial or go for jury duty and see what I mean. Some attorneys forget that they are supposed to be selecting a jury, not placing the jurors on trial. Another great example is that many attorneys refuse to cooperate with opposing counsel, or a claim adjuster, to necessitate a quick and fair resolve for their client. Some attorneys will even go as far in treating their support staff like garbage (drop by ATL and read comments about secretaries and paralegals. Quite eye-opening right there). It is those examples right there which make people loath attorneys so much.

    ReplyDelete
  54. ^That's why I'm so happy I worked a lot of retail jobs in college and was a retail manager before law school. Definitely gives me an edge over fellow law grads who never worked a job where they are exposed to a cross-section of the population on a regular basis.

    That being said, since I went to a TTTT and graduated ITE, prospective employers don't give a shit about the above. But I'm trying to make it on my own, and I feel that I will eventually.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous said...
    @5:45-completely agree and spot on.

    As a mother of a bright nine year old boy, I sometime lose sleep thinking about tuition. I am already forking over thousands to provide my son with extra tutoring and course because frankly, you just don't receive a hard core education in school anymore.
    ________________________________________________

    I really don't want to offend you, but in all likelihood, your child is average. Most children are. By accepting this, you will better prepare him for life, rather than insisting like most middle-class parents that he is "bright" or "gifted." You are really not doing him a service unless he has clearly demonstrated through performance that he is indeed intellectually special--and that doesn't mean collecting the A's they give all the kids in suburban schools just for showing up. Teach him how to save and invest, live within his means, identify marketable skills, and build a business, not how to collect increasingly worthless degrees. This is isn't about No Child Left Behind--it's worthless legislation, but if your child is that bright, it isn't going to stop him from performing academically. And if he is intellectually average, his energies need to be invested elsewhere anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  56. @ 9:22AM: Yes I am offended. Your post was unnecessary.

    But for the record, without even knowing all the facts (which I did not provide information regarding my son skipping a grade and being accepted into John Hopkins math curriculum for children because my son was not the purpose and topic of my post), you jumped in generalizing. Perhaps if you read a wee bit more carefully, I wrote about the problems in the US education system in that pointless legislation and No Child Left Behind is really designed to keep our children back. Unless you are a teacher or even a parent yourself, you are clueless in what goes on in schools. For example, Spanish is no longer offered in my son's school district. I do what any reasonable parent would do--you find an outside source so your kid continues to learn in the fast growing bilingual country.

    And please spare me (or any parent for that matter) your damn hang-ups about Middle Class values and education. The Middle Class have nothing to do with this problem--want to lay the blame somewhere? Look no further than the Liberals and elitists in creating this problem. Although I do sympathize with recent grads and law grads in graduating heavily in debt and being released into a jobless market, spare me your hang-ups about the Middle Class. That's not the point, nor the problem here.

    As a parent it is my job to ensure my son receives the extra support if that is not provided at his school. Would you prefer for me to just rely on what is taught in class and hope and pray that he's prepared to take the SAT when the time comes? Give me a break. You can be bright and have the capacity to comprehend and absorb, but big deal if the school itself is not teaching to a high standard and that is the big problem with elementary education in the US. Standards have been lowered, but this approach is doing a disservice to our children. You can even preach trade schools till the cows come home. Fact is many high schools have done away with its trade programs. Where are the trade schools?

    One big misconception on this blog is that not everyone is meant to open and operate their own business. Not everyone has the equity to start their own business. Not everyone is cut to engage in Blue Collar work for a living. Some people do not have means to open their own business (good luck in receiving a small business grant from the government if you are a white male these days). The big problem is just try to get hired today at many companies without having a degree. Even some retail operations insist that management has Bachelors degree. Most places would not even hire an administrative assistant without a degree. That's a sad fact right there. It would be irresponsible for me as a parent not to ensure that my kid is educated and well prepared for anything that comes his way.

    ReplyDelete
  57. ^ You must really think your little Johnny is really special. Send him to law school then and while you're at it do some renovations in the basement since he will be living with you for the foreseeable future.

    I just have one more thing to say ....

    SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS ... bitch.

    ReplyDelete
  58. They don't just "hand out" A's to suburban kids in high school bro. If they did I wouldn't have failed foreign language!

    Oh and, This is Howard Stern WnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNC and I'd love to sniff your anal vapors!!!

    ReplyDelete
  59. "The Middle Class have nothing to do with this problem"

    BWAHAHAHA!

    Okay, 10:52. Little Jaden is brilliant and going to Harvard, and all of the parents of these existing indentured student loan slaves were the ones who should have sent their kids off to be plumbers. They didn't get it, but you do. Let me guess--you also whine a lot about the evil Boomers who failed to prepare you for the future, right?

    Just a tip, Nando--this is the real reason why your blog is basically a waste of time. Because no one ever sees the need to make any individual changes. They just see the evil deans, and the evil law professors, and the evil student loan pushers, and all those other people who should have become garbage men. But THEY still want to be lawyers, just like the sheeple on Top Law Schools. And they sure as HELL still want their precious snowflakes to be lawyers (or doctors, or something that doesn't require manual labor). And they will keep tell themselves that everyone NEEDS a degree. So keep tilting at those windmills, kid. We wouldn't want one of the Militant Mommies to get OFFENDED.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Bottom Line: I shall give the Restatement of the Rule:

    "Unless properly connected, independently wealthy, or a very attractive young lady, drop out of any Third Tier Toilet bowl law school if your First Year grades do not place you in the top 10% of your TTT class. Otherwise, plan on soloing it."

    Is that a pretty fair analysis? Discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Wow, just wow. Ass hat at 1:29 and 1: 32 has some serious personality defect. Let me take a guess--did you flunk out of Cooley ass-wipe? Your poor reading comprehension is a tip off you probably live in your parent's basement.

    Go back and re-read what poster 10:52 and 6:32 said. One of the problems facing this country is how education is structured. This person was not advocating taking out student loans ass-wipe. And of course a parent will get offended when you attack his/her kid moron.

    Learn some class ass-hole. With your attitude you will barely survive working a McDonalds, let alone help further this cause. You think this blog is pointless, well then fuck off and start writing your own pointless dribble somewhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Hello this Howard Stern WnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNBC and we have a woman in studio who is willing to strip naked and sniff 1:29's anal vapors! This is a first for radio!

    ReplyDelete
  63. This blog and other scamblogs absolutely do serve a purpose. They provide the other side of the argument that higher education is always worth it and that its always a good idea to take out student loans for more education.

    I can use myself as an example. Toward the end of my undergraduate career, I was seriously considering applying to PhD programs. I was majoring in linguistics, which was a very small department at a very big university. I was able to get to know a good number of graduate students and professors who were decent enough to give a realistic picture of graduate school and life after graduate school. The people I talked to said that I would probably do well in the field but cautioned that the academic job market is very tight. They said that getting a job in academia depended on an individual's specialization and there being a vacancy somewhere with a need for that specialization. I was told that there was a strong possibility that there might only be one job in a less than desirable location. I took this advice and decided against pursuing a PhD.

    A few years after undergrad, I started to think about law school. Nothing I read and no one I talked to had anything other than good things to say about law school. There were no scamblogs then. Seeing nothing but upside, I went to law school. I left 110k in debt. I did shit jobs for four years after law school before I found work that pays well. I was accepted to two law schools - the expensive toilet that I went to and a really cheap 3rd tier state school. If I would have had the kind of advice before I decided not to go to grad school before going to law school, I think I would have approached things differently.

    With the scamblogs, 0Ls can get advice other than what the schools and idealistic parents and lawyers who have been practicing for 20 years can give. I first found this blog by googling "Chicago Kent ranking." Someone googling school names or other law school searches has a good chance of finding the scamblogs. No one has to follow this advice, and some lemmings will not be dissuaded, but I am glad that this blog is out there.

    ReplyDelete
  64. ""Unless properly connected, independently wealthy, or a very attractive young lady ..."

    Yes, big breasts and a shapely rear end will take a woman far in this profession. I have SEEN it happen on multiple occasions. I'm sure you have too.

    By the way
    .....................
    .....................

    SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS!!

    ReplyDelete
  65. ^ As I mentioned to Painter on his blog the other day ... If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

    ReplyDelete
  66. ^How about fucking off and starting your own blog ass-wipe. No one gives a fuck about your stupid, vile posts troll. Do yourself a favor and log off and travel to MA to find WTLS and hang with him. Your posts and dumb ass comments about vaporus add nothing to this discussion.

    On another note, Nando and other bloggers have done a fine job in bringing to light about the problems with law school and the over production of attorneys. I only wish that other college grads can chime in that colleges charge way too freakin’ much. I was reading the other day this guy had to take nearly a 50% cut in salary running an auto parts shop and this guy has a MBA. Six-seven years ago, getting an MBA ensured business majors and those who work in management a solid career path. It's bad enough many jobs were outsourced to Asia, but it's another thing these colleges keep jacking up its tuition and not assisting its grads in finding jobs. Sort of makes going to college rather pointless.

    ReplyDelete
  67. ^ I'm merely resorting to the same childish behavior that is displayed by JD Painter on this blog. How dare you categorize me with WTLS. I went to a state TTT, not some crap hole named WNECL. The only thing I have in common with WTLS is that I hope to move back to Mass.

    In any event, I just have one question for you Nando ... will you ... you know ... SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS?

    ReplyDelete
  68. Let me put it in context for you:

    http://analvapor.ytmnd.com/

    Thanks for looking!

    ReplyDelete
  69. The anal vapor poster is just a kid I feel.

    So all of the grown ups should be tolerant and patitent, and laugh among ourselves about the farting infant.

    (Oh! The burdens that Maturity and adulthood entail)

    But as far as Jude Fawley, he died cursing the very day he was born, in so many words, wih a cheering crowd at a sports game in the backdrop.

    And Jude's son, Father Time, hung himself and his siblings with piano wire:

    "Because we arre too meeny"

    Not a happy ending at all.

    Thomas Hardy was heavily criticized, and gave up writing prose after Jude The Obscure, and retreated into Poetry thereafter.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Nando, do your next piece on Brian Leiter, he sure deserves the honor.

    ReplyDelete
  71. "How dare you categorize me with WTLS. I went to a state TTT, not some crap hole named WNECL. The only thing I have in common with WTLS is that I hope to move back to Mass."

    Correction, you have three things in common with WTLS: 1) you both dig living in MA; 2) you both couldn't get accepted into a 1T, but settled in going to a lower ranked law school to prove that your ::cough:: smart; and 3) you are both retarted.

    I will however give WTLS some credit--at least that dude attempted to start his own blog. Why don't you fuck off and do the same?

    ReplyDelete
  72. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Look:

    Ann Coulter, right or wrong, with winsome big blue, merging into seawater green, and mysteriously intelligent eyes all aside, does go around to Radio and TV and College Campuses, and makes the rounds, and tries to engage in debate and discuss.

    Rush and Hannity do talk, and do not feel above talking to anyone that wants to discuss, and I have always appreciated that, whether I agree with Rush or Hannity or not on whatever they are talking about.

    But really, NPR radio and the Liberal Academics, from their Student Loan or taxpayer paid catbird seat seem like they do not feel like they have to talk about anything with anyone, most often.

    How do I know? I don't. It is just a sense I get from, the NPR attitude somehow.

    NPR, in my opinion, most or almost always often, talks down to people in tone. NoO better example than Diane Rhem or Garrison Keillor etc.

    It is all in the inflections or tone etc etc etc, which grates on one after a while.

    As in they are correct all the time, and no further debate is needed.

    And that makes me very nervous.

    But look at it this way:

    When was the last time you saw or heard a University Liberal professor or whatever, reaching out to the general population, and eager to discuss anything?

    Maybe they do. If so, why don't I hear them on the Rush or Hannity program?

    No offense to President Obama, but I don't hear President Obama talking to Hannity once a week or fortnight, or month or whatever.

    Why doesn't the President do so?

    In my most negative moods, I think that the Liberals, and especially the Academics, feel that they don't have to talk to anyone, because they are all on the taxpayer or the Student Lending sugar teat/gravy train, and feel a sense of entitlement.

    And RE: WTLS: he is a poet, but he don't know it. And I have had some laughs over the poems of WTLS.

    For the record, I never said I was for Socialism.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Oooo wow! You located a a typo! Here I was thinking the only talent you have is raging on about farts, and being obsessed with JDP! I’m impressed you picked up that the incorrect homophone was used. However in comparison to your several several, rage fuelled posts made today (in which added nothing to this discussion), that typo really is no big deal.

    I said this before, but it bears repeating: YOU ARE RETARTED.

    Now get in your car and go to Springfield so you can find WTLS and hang with him.

    If you can't keep on topic or engage in intelligent, respectful dialogue with others, just fuck off. You had much to say about JDP derailing this blog with his posts just a few days ago hypocrite. If you have nothing worthy to state, then don’t post. No one cares about your obsession with JDP. Grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  75. This blog is fucking awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Look, I'm not saying that the Conservatives will have a solution.

    I have yet to hear the Conservatives discuss the Scamblogs, or nondischargeable Student Loan Debt at length.

    Rush Limbaugh, I have observed, cannot be stumped, and has a world view (His Institute For Advanced Conservative Studies) and so I would like to hear what Rush or Hannity or well....Beck or O'Reilly or....(sigh) me Scottish Lass, Ann Coulter, has to say about, say, the 1 Trillion in Student Loan Debt issue.

    If their proposed solution (assuming they have one in mind)sounds like a "Devil's Embrace"
    we can all go from there.

    But first I want to hear some talk, and hopefully the political position or stance from the Right.

    And then later the Left of course.

    But I'll start with the Right because I've been trying to grab the attention of the Right, since I am most familiar with the Radio hosts as I say.

    Ann Coulter once said that there is only a right foot and a left foot, and no middle foot.

    I beg to differ. The Venutians (From the planet Venus)have a middle foot, which tends to rather cloud their political debate.

    And the race of mainly gentle and genial, (though occassionally known to be hot headed and irascible during election season) Mercurians have three middle feet, and so Mercurian politics is all skewed as a result, and nothing ever gets accomplished on that glowing red and molten planet, except for a lot of sun bathing.

    ReplyDelete
  77. "I beg to differ. The Venutians (From the planet Venus) have a middle foot, which tends to rather cloud their political debate."

    And you must be from Mars Painter. By the way, I have a request if you would be so kind .....................

    I would be honored if you would SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS!!!

    ReplyDelete
  78. I agree with the above comment about possible next topics. The next posts should be about Brian Leiter and/or that hypocrite on the Law Prawfs blog, Paul Horwitz. Horwitz had to have his wife come defend him in the comments section when he was called out for being a stooge for the AALS. Then he shut down comments.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Wow, just wow. Ass hat at 1:29 and 1: 32 has some serious personality defect. Let me take a guess--did you flunk out of Cooley ass-wipe? Your poor reading comprehension is a tip off you probably live in your parent's basement.

    Go back and re-read what poster 10:52 and 6:32 said. One of the problems facing this country is how education is structured. This person was not advocating taking out student loans ass-wipe. And of course a parent will get offended when you attack his/her kid moron.

    Learn some class ass-hole. With your attitude you will barely survive working a McDonalds, let alone help further this cause. You think this blog is pointless, well then fuck off and start writing your own pointless dribble somewhere else.
    ________________________________________________________________

    Suggesting a child might be average is insulting them? And I graduated from a Tier I and have been employed as an attorney for over 6 years, but if I had to "survive working a McDonalds," then that's what I would do, because I was taught by my parents how to do what I had to in order to survive no matter what. I made it through college and law school on full scholarships. I didn't keep my parents awake at night worrying about paying for my education, and I haven't been reduced to blathering abut anal vapors or Sean Hannity because I'm butthurt when someone gently questions the prospects of my Indigo Child. I have more "class" than that, and I still wouldn't suggest that 99% of the young people I encounter go to law school, or that 85% of them go to college when they have no idea what they are going to use their so-called education for, and they will be accumulating debt without a commensurate ROI.

    If the woman is laying awake at night worried about how she will pay tuition, student loans are on the horizon--the end. Why does it upset the two of you to have that pointed out? Why does it enrage you to think about applying the bromides constantly promoted by the scamblogs to your own lives? Rush Limbaugh would tell someone who can't afford to pay to college that they don't need to go. That isn't an "attack," moron. That's a statement of fact. If he can't afford it, he needs to find some other way to make it in life.

    Now: BONER, SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS, DUNG HEAP, blah blah blah. Is that more comprehensible?

    ReplyDelete
  80. ^ Let me put this in a language that everyone can more easily understand:

    http://analvapor.ytmnd.com/

    ReplyDelete
  81. @7:24 Your T1 Law School obviously did not teach you Reading Comprehension, 101. The commenter with the kid was concerned about rising costs of tuition as well as the problems in the US Educational System. She didn't come on her to brag and trade stories about her kid jack ass.

    If you actually took the time to ACTUALLY READ the post instead of getting stuck that this was a parent posting (and a mother no less which leads me to believe you are probably sexist), perhaps you would have also read about the problems with elementary and high school education in the US. Fact of the matter kids who are not handy with their hands can't engage in blue collar work, and most jobs require a degree of some sort. If you don’t believe me, just log on to Monster.com and run a check of administrative assistant and middle management positions and see what I mean. Higher academia to a point has brainwashed companies that a degree indicates you know what you are doing (which of course does not). If you cannot understand how parents are concerned for their kids’ future, well then I feel really badly for your clients that they have an attorney who seriously lacks empathy and a personality.

    By the way, people post as "Anonymous" because sometimes Google does not allow one to sign on with their account and it's hard to keep track who responded to what. If you were offended in being lumped in with the TTT law student troll who is trying to be cute with his vapor comments, my apologies. However, your comment to that parent was way out of line. Your comment did not even address her post to begin with. You made references that her kid was merely average which can be interpreted as insulting. The parent didn't come on to blog and boast about her kid jack ass. Try reading carefully and park your own god dam hang-ups about the Middle Class, mothers, and whatever else pisses you off. I would be easily offended too if someone made wise ass remarks like "Indigo Child", and accusing me in making out my kid is something that he isn't.

    On another note, poster 7:24 pretty much proves the point I made at 4:03 the other day: people hate attorneys because of the condensending attitude, not the money that is supposedly earned.

    No one gives a fuck about that you graduated from a 1T law school. Show some courtesy and respect to others, despite that they may have not went to law school, or didn't go to a T25 school like you did. In the grand scheme of things, no one really cares that you made it .

    ReplyDelete
  82. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  83. 10:31AM here and I am *not* Nando. I am however an advocate and supporter of Nando and the other scam-bloggers. At least their time posting about the serious problems with student loan debt and higher education is productive, unlike your sophomoric posts.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I'm sophomoric and proud of it. Painter is my newfound idol. I take after him.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Here's my radio listening lineup:

    Howard Stern in the morning
    The Herd with Collin Cowherd middays
    Afternoons either Mic'd Up Mike Francessa or The Michael Kay show
    Don't listen to anything in the evening
    And if I have the pleasure of being up late I listen to Red Eye Radio (fantastic show that airs starting at 1am, I highly recommend it)

    ReplyDelete
  86. Report them for mail fraud!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  87. ^ Please explain. And while you're at it, SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS!

    ReplyDelete
  88. Oh, how hard it is to try and set some young people right.

    The wet behind the ears puppy that keeps going on and on with his unbounded glee for expressing the joys of toilet training, is now on to a new and major Work of ingenious Scholarship: "Snifing Anal Vapors"

    A title that shall, no doubt, show up in the Marquee lights on Broadway, someday.

    But still, the author of "sniff my anal vapors" must be wearing his Little Lord Fauntleroy suit every time he tries to pretend, with a poopy diaper, and with dismal results, that he is cute, and even obnoxious. (Yawn)

    Only babies are cute, in most cases.

    And only clever people are intentionally obnoxious.

    So grow up kid and get used to the big, bad world,and learn how to be really crude. Cause you ain't nothin, and haven't been to real school yet on what is really crude.

    But still, the anal vapor commenter is successful in another sense:

    He is woefully offensive, given that he will never amount to anything more than a great, big, stupid Baby Huey, with a stinkey diaper, surrounded by anal vapors, in much the same way Pig Pen was constantly surrounded by a cloud of dust and dirt.

    And all the while really, really dumb, and stupid, and dull witted, and slow.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Nando:

    I've come out and defended JD Painter several times on this blog.
    JD Painter has really gone too far in terms of immaturity.
    I change my mind: Nix him.

    MMA lawyer

    ReplyDelete
  90. I second that motion. And please ban the "vapor" troll as well. This blog is too important to be derailed by stupid, off topic remarks by posters who have nothing of value to say.

    On another note, I came across this video on You Tube regarding the College Conspiracy. If anyone has one 1.5 hour to spare, this vidoe is well worth your time in watching this video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZtX32sKVE&feature=feedlik

    ReplyDelete
  91. ^ I just want you to know that my immature postings re: Sniff my anal vapors, were in response to the continuous, chronic and off-topic posts by JD Painter. I think he's finally got the message, although I wish he would not be so damn verbose. Prior to my "troll" comments throughout this post, I contributed much to this blog and hope to continue in that capacity going forward. All I wanted to do was to have Nando tell his "buddy" JD Painter to get with the program and stop making us all look bad. But, Nando chose his side and continues to defend Painter despite the increasing number of people complaining. Look, I've stepped away from my position to remove Painter's blog from the side bar. I'm not saying he can't or shouldn't contribute - I just want him to post comments that are on topic and don't distract away from the primary message of this blog without resorting to discussions on boners, etc. Is that too much to ask for? So with that, let me just have my final 15 minutes of fame and exclaim for, hopefully, the last time ...

    SNIFF MY ANAL VAPORS.

    ReplyDelete
  92. ^You just contradicted everything you complained about JDP doing.

    I'm not a fan of Painter either. I think he rambles on and on, in which the point he is trying to make ends up being really worthless. However there was no need for you to flood this board with pointless, sophmoric remarks either. If people are doing research of blogs because of something they may have heard on talk radio, or read in the NYT or any trade publication, and they come across some of the comments made here (excluding the minor typos posted here and there), what do you think people would think? I doubt reading some of these comments posted on here this past week would garner any sympathy for those who graduated, but cannot find jobs.

    I do get where you are coming from, but you trying to prove a point made the rest of us who support this blog and movement look like asses. We have a problem here in the US with student loan debt and outrageous cost of tuition. Can we focus on that instead?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Sure we can focus on that. I think you misunderstood my basis for the immature postings. I think my postings finally allowed everyone to recognize that there are "some" individuals that are abusing this blog with nonsense about right-wing radio, boners and other attention-seeking behavior. I've made it known on this blog that this crap should be left for Painter's OWN blog, not here - but he continues to believe everyone is interested in his ongoing, nonsensical rants about Ann Coulter et al. As I pointed out in my last post, I'm ready to move on. The only question that remains is ... are you? Nando, let's get a new thread going here. I'm getting really sick of look at that ugly rat bastard professor. Makes me sick to my stomach actually.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Nando, please update this site. I can withstand seeing pictures of shit and pigs rolling in feces but everytime I come on this site and see a picture of Olivas, I get sick. Last night I had a dream that I was eight years old and a man that resembles Olivas was chasing me around a playground. Olivas has a face of a pervert of the evil kind. Please move on from this story. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Olivas is a shamelessly and exceptionally unkempt person. Only in academe would someone continuously walk around looking this ridiculous. I have seen unemployed, alcoholic homeless persons waking up after a night at the bus station looking more presentable than this. I can see where others may find real discomfort in having to view this unfortunate-looking "professor."

    Ah, the glamor of it all.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Nando where did u go?

    Law scammer Brian Leiter is trying to out lawprof. You should give this butthead the TTR treatment.

    ReplyDelete
  97. The new white is poor.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Is anyone missing a creepy garden gnome?!?!

    Let’s head to page to page 11 of Ass-Clown’s CV:

    http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/cv/michaelolivas.pdf

    “Law School Admissions Council (Chair, LSAC Conference Planning Committee, 1994; Chair, LSAC/ABA/AALS Conference Planning Committee, 1999-2000); Elected to Executive Committee, assigned to Law Access Board, 1992-1998 “

    One might think that this is simply another “service assignment” on an LSAC or ABA board or committee. However, on page 18, we note the following entry:

    “Trustee, Law Access, Inc., d/b/a The Access Group, 1992-1998”

    As “IRR Soldier” pointed out, Olivas the Pig is associated with the foul organization known as Access Group. Thank you for pointing this out, IRR.

    To the ball-less piece of trash who posted on August 13, 2011, at 6:55 pm:

    Hypocrite is spelled with an “e” on the end, moron. By the way, I never said that I don’t use personal attacks. The difference is that I do so - after decimating my opponents on the facts. What can I say? Sometimes, I cannot refrain from throwing a sharp, quick jab at shills and swine.

    Now, YOU can return to eat your mother’s cornhole. You might be wary of the stench, however, since the cheap slut has slept with ten men in the last week. 8-17

    Turde, I just returned from a week-long vacation.

    @ 8-18-11 8:53 am,

    What makes you think that JD Painter and I are the same person, I.e. “All I wanted to do was to have Nando tell his "buddy" JD Painter to get with the program and stop making us all look bad”? He lives in New York, and I reside in a different part of the country. I have actually talked to Painter, by phone. I honestly do not give a damn what he chooses to post on his site.

    You keep stating that Painter is hurting this blog - and the greater movement - with his colorful and unorthodox comments. Regarding this specific entry, I have not seen anyone other than YOU revert to infantile remarks, i.e. “anal vapors” and boners. Frankly, I do not dismiss those who listen to AM talk radio. How do you expect to build a coalition, if you don't listen to the views of others? (Conservatives are not blameless, on this front.) The fact is that upper-class liberals have exacerbated the current “higher education” situation - with their unyielding insistence that pretty much EVERYONE should go to college. This has helped create a rush to colleges and universities. At that point, the schools then argue, “The demand for our product demands large increases in tuition rates, i.e. “We must hire more professors and administrators. In addition, we must also construct more buildings and larger classrooms, plus more parking, larger student unions, and other services.”

    ReplyDelete
  99. I guess you told me you fuck! CENSORSHIP ALERT!!!! By the way, I think your comments about my mother sound like libel to me. But then again, you never did pass your bar exam so how would you know.

    ReplyDelete
  100. I guess you couldn't handle the truth Nando. So instead of letting all your followers see you for what you really are, you decided to delete my post.

    ReplyDelete
  101. ^And your comment about his mother sounded libelous too.

    So I guess the lesson is for you to shut the fuck up, 8:34. Or you can eat your mom's asshole like nando suggested. Or you can do both.

    ReplyDelete
  102. ^ Are you (Nando) ready to move on ass wipe?

    ReplyDelete
  103. It is amazing how some people vicariously think that they are Nando.

    The Anal Vapor kid came to my blog and left one really, really fucking hostile anal vapor comment after endorsing Ron Paul (which I am sure Ron Paul would really, really appreciate)

    The lunatic (lgalgal) woman who can't resist coming back to my blog said that I could have paid 1K a month on mostly less than 35K a year income over a 10 year term is not just a luntatic, but bat shit crazy, and out of touch with reality, as some like to say about me.

    The NJ kid will get his come-uppance in the big bad world. I suggest that the NJ kid paint alongside of ex-cons, as I have had, in the underground economy, and learn a new vocabulary.

    But I mean GODDAMN! I put my fucking law school Transcript up, and everyone wanted to have a look, and I got a big swell in traffic.

    Let's see your transcript, Anal Vapor kid.

    Let's see your transcript, lunatic lgalgal.

    And you too, Linden New Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I don't need to show my transcript. What is the point of doing that? I'm not looking to garner attention, unlike some people around here.

    ReplyDelete
  105. http://ip-whois-lookup.com/lookup.php?ip=68.46.140.162

    The miserable piece of trash from Linden, NJ is responsible for the "anal vapors" remarks. I guess he is still upset because his mother washes the skid marks off his tighty whiteys. Unless, of course, the cockroach is still wearing Superman underwear.

    Time Visitor Session
    Aug 20 2011 7:03pm 68.46.140.162 6 actions 6m 14s
    Aug 20 2011 9:26am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 9s
    Aug 20 2011 8:52am 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 20 2011 8:48am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 6s
    Aug 20 2011 8:40am 68.46.140.162 3 actions 1m 37s
    Aug 20 2011 8:33am 68.46.140.162 6 actions 1m 15s
    Aug 20 2011 8:27am 68.46.140.162 7 actions 3m 28s
    Aug 20 2011 8:05am 68.46.140.162 6 actions 15m 29s
    Aug 20 2011 7:08am 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 20 2011 6:56am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 10m 8s
    Aug 20 2011 4:18am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 10s
    Aug 20 2011 3:35am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 53s
    Aug 19 2011 7:38pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 19 2011 7:11pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 11s
    Aug 19 2011 6:31pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 15m 30s
    Aug 19 2011 6:02pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 19 2011 5:37pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 9s
    Aug 19 2011 4:29pm 68.46.140.162 3 actions 2m 9s
    Aug 19 2011 7:42am 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 19 2011 7:05am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 2m 5s
    Aug 19 2011 5:48am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 10s
    Aug 18 2011 5:49pm 68.46.140.162 3 actions 6m 38s
    Aug 18 2011 12:59pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 4s
    Aug 18 2011 12:55pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 2m
    Aug 18 2011 7:51am 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 18 2011 7:31am 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 18 2011 5:45am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 2m 5s
    Aug 18 2011 5:39am 68.46.140.162 1 action 1m
    Aug 18 2011 5:13am 68.46.140.162 1 action 8m
    Aug 18 2011 3:50am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 38s
    Aug 17 2011 7:27pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 11s
    Aug 17 2011 6:37pm 68.46.140.162 3 actions 11m 20s
    Aug 17 2011 6:10pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 4s
    Aug 17 2011 3:55pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 17 2011 3:12pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 4s
    Aug 17 2011 7:12am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 4s
    Aug 17 2011 6:44am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 2m 5s
    Aug 17 2011 6:27am 68.46.140.162 2 actions 1m 3s
    Aug 17 2011 6:18am 68.46.140.162 7 actions 7m 12s
    Aug 17 2011 5:17am 68.46.140.162 3 actions 5m 3s
    Aug 17 2011 4:45am 68.46.140.162 3 actions 16m 16s
    Aug 16 2011 7:45pm 68.46.140.162 8 actions 19m 45s
    Aug 16 2011 7:11pm 68.46.140.162 5 actions 16m 56s
    Aug 16 2011 6:33pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 5s
    Aug 16 2011 6:22pm 68.46.140.162 8 actions 2m 23s
    Aug 16 2011 6:18pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 10s
    Aug 16 2011 6:08pm 68.46.140.162 10 actions 8m 47s
    Aug 16 2011 5:51pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 1m
    Aug 16 2011 5pm 68.46.140.162 1 action 8m 39s
    Aug 16 2011 4:42pm 68.46.140.162 2 actions 5s

    Does anyone think that this pile of moist waste needs a girlfriend or a hobby?!?! By the way, unlike you, I am proud to stand behind my remarks, bitch.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Move on you prick. Continuing the argument with you is pointless.

    ReplyDelete
  107. ^Let's get this straight:

    You come onto this blog, post juvenile comments about vapors, insult other posters (such as the mother who posted about her concern regarding tuition), and try picking a fight with JDP and Nando, and now you are pissed off because you have been called out?

    Why don't *you* move on and start your own blog ass-wipe. Maybe JDP can visit your blog and pollute your board with comments about paint thinner vapors?

    Grow up jerk.

    ReplyDelete

 
Web Analytics