Friday, June 13, 2014

ABA Cockroaches Allow Law School Diploma Mills to Admit 10% of Students Without Taking the LSAT

It’s All About the Money: On June 10, 2014, Paul Caron reported on this developmenTTT in his blog piece, “ABA: Law Schools Can Admit 10% of Students Without LSAT, Must Do Annual Audit of Placement Data, Can't Give Academic Credit for Paid Externships.” Look at the following excerpt:

“The governing council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has wrapped up its comprehensive review of the law school accreditation standards.

The [nest of cockroaches], which met Friday in Cleveland, approved five of the six remaining proposed changes in the standards, including one that would permit schools to admit up to 10 percent of their entering class with students who haven’t taken the LSAT and one that would limit the number of transfer credits a school can grant for prior law study not taken as a JD-degree student at an ABA-approved school.” [Emphasis mine]

The pieces of trash at the racketeer influenced and corrupt organization known as the American Bar Association are FULLY AWARE that fewer people are applying to, and enrolling in, ABA-accredited schools. Instead of making the “professors” and administrator pigs do with less, the whores on this committee have lowered “standards” further. As I noted in another forum, I gave these rodents too much credit when I wrote “Before you know it, you will only need to pull a 140 LSAT score and post a pic of your girfriend’s feet on your Personal Statement, in order to gain admission.”

Other Coverage: On June 10, 2014, “dupednontraditional” authored an excellent OTLSS piece labeled “Declining Applicants and Declining Standards.” He gets right to the meat and potatoes of this garbage deci$ion:

“Look no further than right here:

Oops. Applicants are down 7.8% over last year, and prior years saw even more precipitous drops. Just like the Fed running the printing press in order to juice the system with more cash, the ABA is trying to juice the faltering legal profession and law schools by removing any semblance of standards. Like a NINA loan during the subprime crisis, you don't need "income" or "assets"...just a pulse.

Which could be fine, maybe, in some universe, if (1) there was an extreme shortage of lawyers, (2) tuition was reasonable, and (3) if a test like the LSAT was keeping qualified people out of the profession by arbitrary and capricious standards.” [Emphasis mine]

As scambloggers have noted, for years: the law school swine do not give one damn about YOU, the student or recent graduate. You are a mere means to an end. The bitches and hags need asses in seats, in order to get their filthy hooves on all those federal dollars. Of course, you can count on the academic thieves to spin this as “ensuring diversity” in the classroom and “profession.” By the way, doesn’t that attitude imply that brown and black people are too damn dumb to get into law school on their own efforts?

The Law School Truth Center published an epically hilarious article, on June 11, 2014, under the headline “Viva la Innovacion! LSAT Less Mandatory Than Yesterday.” Read this gem:

“See? You all bitch that law schools don't try to save students money. Now a tenth of the class doesn't have to pay the LSAT administration fee! Also, now law schools can be more flexible about, like, bringing in diverse candidates who just don't test well.

If you're in a state like Wisconsin, you can now go to law school without taking the LSAT and waive into the bar. The eradication of the severe oppression of taking standardized tests after the SAT may well have begun.” [Emphasis mine]

Keep in mind that Iowa is also considering allowing those who attend in-state law sewers to skip the bar exam. Why don’t the bastards simply get rid of the LSAT altogether, and automatically enroll anyone who has the following qualifications: (a) an IQ above 85; and (b) the desire to go to law school?!?!

Hell, chiropractors go through more stringent requirements than lawyers. At this rate, it will soon be more difficult to get a real estate license or gain CPA certification than to become an attorney.

Hilarious Commentary: Lastly, check out this epic comment from JDU accountholder “murdock,” which was posted on the thread entitled “ABA Accreditation Standards: Law Schools Can Admit 10% of Students Without LSAT.” It was submitted on June 10, 2014 at 10:10 am:

“This is absolutely disastrous and stupid. Anyone looking to the ABA for even a semblance of reform is clearly going to be monstrously disappointed. Law school has literally become open enrollment for anyone who can sit through the LSAT and spell their name at the top.

Up next, law schools can admit up to 5% of their students without a pulse.” [Emphasis mine]

Hell, I wouldn’t put it past the sick bitches to recruit in the morgue, so that they can enroll corpses into their “prestigious” toilets. Then again, the ABA may decide to limit such “applicants” to those who died of natural causes. After all, the bastards need to maintain some level of “standards,” right?!?!

Conclusion: The law school pigs are simply trying to extend the scam for as long as possible. Once they hit retirement age, they will be happy to watch the $y$tem implode. After all, their deranged mentality is “I got mine. You get yours.” Again, these “educators” do not care what happens to their students.  Likewise, the American Bar Association criminals have ZERO INTEGRITY!  Don’t be surprised if the ABA later permits member schools to waive the LSAT requirement for up to 20 percent of the class. Plus, last year the ABA extended the “placement” rate deadline to 10 months from graduation, in order to bolster those figures. Perhaps, they will also count laying sod or raking leaves for your sister in law as “employment.”


  1. Why isn't the Federal Reserve sounding alarm bells about the massive student loan debt bubble? Congress is in paralytic shock with Republicans fixated on a Cantor establishment implosion and Democrats who think that equality of opportunity means that any dolt can attend "Law" skool, or indeed any higher education establishment.

    When the student loan bubble bursts like the 2007 real estate mortgage debacle write off, what is the policy prescription? Gee, no collateral, so won't it be worse? Does the Fed try negative interest rates?

    Why isn't the Justice Department reopening their 1995 civil antitrust investigation in which they charged that the ABA section on Legal education was captured by the bottom feeder law schools?

    God help us.

    1. Will it burst?

      I have six young cousins all in high school, eagerly awaiting college ... one of them may get a scholarship, but there parents have very little to no money saved for them.

      Besides joining the military, what can they do? Make sandwiches at Subway?

      My sister is nineteen ... she cannot find a summer job at Dunkin Donuts.

      I think the bubble is going to keep inflating for another four or five years at least.

      Young people are desperate.

    2. At this point, I'm beginning to believe they can keep the economy running on smoke and fumes indefinitely. The young keep voting liberal Democrat and everyone just ignores reality, and apparently makes up a new reality.

      There are enough winners still to keep things going, especially if you just shame and then ignore the losers until they go away.

      When the Boomers start dying off I suppose the economy could start again, but the problem is the same thing will likely repeat with the then new older generations strangling the economy. People live far too long, that is one of the major issues, the other is the government is entirely corrupt and capitalism just does not work without bankruptcy protection in place.

    3. I agree with that. You need 20 percent winners ... and then the middle 60 percent think they have a shot, the bottom 20 are shamed.

      Just as a point of advice, outside of specific fields (engineering, nursing, accounting) I would tell any average young person not to try to get a real job until they are at least 30.

      From what I see from some of my friends who are about to break into Big Law and high-paying finance jobs ... the debt and struggle to get their are not worth it ... and only the top of the top ever get there. You need connections or wealth to avoid the sacrifices which ruin your social life and health.

      Part of the problem is the stigma against being a 'loser' and not going to college.

      'Winning' in today's economy has everything to do with being wise about your choices, if you don't already have connections or your parents money backing your education.

      The majority are lemmings and will continue to in-debt themselves.

      I went to and graduated college at the top of my class ... and didn't want to go into debt for a graduate level education so I got a trade.

      Nothing wrong with that.

    4. I had no debt after college, but I didn't really get any opportunities out of college. Likely I would have gotten a government gig around a year after graduation, but by that time I had already signed up for law school. What I should have done then was taken the government gig (if it was offered) and then just skipped law school. Too late now though.

      All I really wanted was a decent career. The trades do give that to you. Law really does not.

      But what I don't understand is that comment about not trying to get a real job until 30. What does that mean?

  2. If the federal government backed student loans for corpses, you know the law schools would admit them. The boneless ABA rule-makers would find a reason, maybe "bioanimation diversity".

    It would be less cruel to admit corpses, than to admit living, breathing students, who have no talent for law. These students are being led away from decent careers in things they are good at, toward some unrealistic "dream".

    Since the whole scam is just a scheme to deliver taxpayer dollars to law schools, I say skip the students and go with corpses. The taxpayers are screwed either way, but with corpses there are no 22 year olds with ruined lives.

    1. Haaaah!!

      (Don Adams voice on)

      Their lives are already ruined. They don't have them.

      (Don Adams voice off)

  3. A number of law schools already have agreements in place with the parent university where if a student can get a high ugpa, he can get admitted to the law school.

    What's to stop the poli sci idiots from law school now? You have a ridiculously easy major. Get a 3.6+ gpa. Skip the lsat. Get admitted to the law school. And you get to stay in state so you can pay less tuition (if it's a public college.) Enrollment will go up. Especially when urm's take advantage of this.

    1. Why not just major in General Studies at a state undergrad, get a 3.8+, study for the LSAT all four years with that free time, and get a full ride to a top 40 law school?

  4. What if I were to tell you that your Cooley degree will get you an associate position with Davis Polk at 160 K per year?
    Would you believe mid-law at 90K?
    How about JD advantage at 35K?
    Part time at Home Depot at $10 per hour?

  5. On a side note aren't law schools starting to recruit at high schools and historically black colleges? I remember hearing something about Vermont Law School or another shithole in the northeast partnering with a black college to get more people in seats.

    1. Yup, it was VLS. I think they were actually stationing admission counselors at the black colleges to steer potential students in the right (not) direction.

  6. Something tells me that the law schools will still require undergrads to take the LSAT (lots of muppets for the fleecing in that racket too) in order to apply to law school. It's just that the law schools won't have to report their bottom ten percent of applicants. Another Villanova scandal would be bad for business.

  7. Nando, you really need to get rid of that disgusting picture of Adams and his long-suffering wife. I'm tired of vomiting Rice-a-Roni all over my keyboard every time I visit this site. Enough is enough, and it's got to stop.

    1. NO!

      Keep it up, and put Painter's ugly mugshot up there too. Maybe that will stop him hijacking EVERY FUCKING COMMENTS SECTION on EVERY FUCKING SCAMBLOG.

    2. Yep. It's all about Painter and his persecutors, isn't it? Everyone's a racist too. Well, I say this: For those who claim to be so non-judgemental in their thinking, prove it's more than that. Prove it by action. Go live in the ghetto with your black brethren. And hope they don't beat the shit out of you and kill you, you know, to make up for a few centuries of oppression and injustice by The Man. Just keep repeating: "Can't we all just GET ALONG?!?" as the brothers beat you to death. Then, at least, you can die with a clear conscience.

    3. Wow 103, you really are terrified of black people, aren't you? No wonder you talk about them all the time. Thanks for giving us a peek inside the mind of a pathetic racist troll.

  8. Fucko AlexopoulosJune 13, 2014 at 11:48 AM

    Hey Status Monkey.

    Remember that notice I gave her about showing up for a deposition at the Dunkin' Donuts on 167th? We're gonna have to move it up to this Monday.

    I had a client who I represented on a OWI and she hasn't paid me yet. So she calls me yesterday and sez to me that she'll have sex with me as payment. Her husband goes into work earlly on Tuesdays. So I'll be seeing her on Tuesday not you. Sorry for the late notice.

    Oh and we're planning on suing you for racism and for making my client batshit crazy. painter wants to bring you before the Hague too. I'm sure where it's at but it sounds important.

    1. This is the racist troll's idealized view of what practicing law is really like. In his demon-haunted fantasy world, this is the best job he ever had.

  9. If you have an hour to kill, here's a documentary. Just replace "Detroit" with "The Legal Profession."

  10. The ABA has no guiding principles. They are all shitbags.

  11. The commenter at 1:03 is a RACIST. ALL of you are RACISTS!

    If you ask John Koch to get a job and stop gobbling up the retirement funds of his centennarian parents, then you are a fucking racist, too. Who is also addicted to porn, naturally.


    John Koch, the lily-white Anglo-Saxon paintroach and ultimate victim of racism against black people - !um, apparently

    1. I know you. You're the racist "black booty" troll. Do you even have a clue that your obsession with black people's body parts makes you a social leper?

    2. You know, 625, you're trying to be snarky, trying to be clever, but you just don't have the intelligence to pull it off. Or the knowledge, either.

      Have you ever wondered what "Anglo-Saxon" really means? How do you get that from a name like Koch? A place like Touro? And Long Island? All the evidence points to Painter being Jewish.

      I guess now you'll try to go out and smash up a synagogue somewhere, but I can't help that. It was far more important that I show you, and everyone else, what an idiot you are.

    3. For whatever it's worth, Koch is a Jewish name.

    4. It's a German name meaning "cook." That many common German family names are also Jewish is only interesting to genealogists and Anti-Semites. Which one of those are you?

    5. False alternatives. I'm a dedicated and courageous investigator who hunts down racists and Nazis on the Internet. It only makes sense that someone who hates and fears black people's bodies would also hate Jews. I think we've found our man.

  12. Paintroach should move out of his parents' house and become a janitor at Touro.

    If he works at Touro for ten years, then poof! All his loans would be discharged under PSLF.

    Somehow I'm guessing that whole "work for ten years thing" is a deal-breaker for the roach, however. What a racist system we live in!

    1. "A Janitor at Touro"

      Now there is an interesting question.

      Now that Touro has integrated itself into a Federal Complex in Islip, Long Island, NY.

      Now that Touro has done so and finally, does that make any Janitors that work for Touro private or Federal Employees?

      When I enrolled at Touro, the school was ABA accredited for all of 3 years, and became AALS accredited while I was enrolled and I remember that one or two Touro professors proudly announced to the classroom about how Touro was then newly admitted into the AALS and about how it was all oh so prestigious.

      Eileen Kaufman and Marjorie Silver, if my recollections serve me.

      That poor Elizabeth Gonzalez memorial tree ended up a dead stump, and I well remember the pious show that Eileen Kaufman put on when EG died.

      J. Kirkland Grand grew terribly mad and all because two or three students had not briefed their cases and screamed at the classroom about how we would all end up being responsible for people's lives and walked out on the 1L contracts class with 15 to 20 minutes to spare, and I snuck out of the back of the classroom and saw him joking around with someone in the hallway.

      Oh Dear God who were these people? And what about the lives of the students?

  13. "Why don’t the bastards simply get rid of the LSAT altogether, and automatically enroll anyone who has the following qualifications: (a) an IQ above 85; and (b) the desire to go to law school?!?! "

    Damn it, this isn't fair to people with IQs of 85 or less. Since I only have an IQ of 78, this will end my dreams of practicing international space law. More intellectual diversity is needed in the law schools. We all need to write the ABA to drop these absurd and elitist requirements for law school.

  14. This garbage rule change has been in the works for some time. The law school pigs have been permitted to waive the LSAT for their university’s undergrads – in an effort to boost JD enrollment at that particular in$tituion.

    Take a look at this Debra Cassens Weiss article in the ABA Journal, back on April 9, 2010. The piece was entitled “Another Law School Drops LSAT Requirement for Its Undergrads.” I have provided the full text of that story below:

    “The University of St. Thomas law school is seeking to boost diversity with a new early admissions program that drops the requirement for the Law School Admissions Test for some applicants.

    St. Thomas undergrads will be considered for law school admission based on grades and college entrance exams, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports. A personal statement and letters of recommendation will also be required, according to Tommie Media. The school is one of a handful that got permission from the ABA to waive the test for a limited number of students.

    Cari Haaland, the school’s director of admissions, told Tommie Media that the Tommie Law Early Admission program could save the average student nearly $1,000 in fees.

    Law schools that have announced similar programs include the University of Michigan, the University of Alabama and the University of Illinois.

    The University of Minnesota law school tried a different tack, the Star-Tribune says. Two years ago it started an LSAT preparation program for students in under-represented populations, and about 25 participated. Only one enrolled at the school.

    A recent study found a drop in the percentage of African-Americans and Mexican Americans entering law school from 1993 to 2008. Over that period, entering enrollment dropped by 7.5 percent for African-Americans and 11.7 percent for Mexican Americans. The study was a collaboration of the Society of American Law Teachers and the Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at Columbia University’s law school.”

    Apparently, “law professor” cockroaches did not consider the likelihood that black and Hispanic students have have been turned off by the prohibitive cost of attending law school – especially since most of them are not from wealthy families. By the way, those “educators” DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about these minority students. You can bet your ass that these sewage pits will also gladly take in plenty of dumb white kids who couldn’t pull a decent LSAT score, under this new rule. After all, this is a ploy to: (a) get more money, via higher enrollment; (b) improve the median matriculant UGPA at the law school; and (c) do this without impacting the average or median LSAT of the incoming class.

    These supposed liberals merely toss out the term “diversity” in order to come up with some rationale for their selfish actions. They do the same thing with words such as “justice” and “public service.” Anyone over the age of 12 should realize that justice almost never occurs in a courtroom or legal proceeding.


    On January 13, 2011, the ABA Journal published a piece labeled “LSAT Would Be Optional Under Possible ABA Accreditation Change.” The author was Debra Cassens Weiss. Look at this excerpt:

    “Updated: Would-be law students may not have to go through the ordeal of the Law School Admission Test if a proposal by an ABA committee is adopted.

    Currently, accreditation rules require law schools to ask applicants for results of a "valid and reliable admission test,” the National Law Journal reports. But that may change, says Santa Clara University law school dean Donald Polden, the chairman of an ABA committee reviewing the standards.

    A “substantial portion” of the ABA committee believes the rule should be repealed, Polden told the NLJ. He and officials from the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar pointed out that a small number of law schools already have been granted waivers by the ABA to admit some high-performing students from their own undergraduate institutions who haven’t taken the test.

    Even if the rule is dropped, Polden believes that most law schools will still require the LSAT as a way to differentiate among applicants and to make financial-aid decisions.”

    This means that the bitches and hags at the American Bar Association have been considering such a proposal for more than three years. Once fewer people were taking the LSAT, and law school enrollment dropped, for SEVERAL YEARS IN ROW, the rats miraculously decided to approve this change. What a “coincidence,” huh?!?!

    Perhaps the cockroaches will start enrolling those who have at least three semesters of community college under their belts. Maybe the pieces of trash will next waive the LSAT requirement for blonde women and left-handed people.

    Lastly, could you imagine – for two goddamn seconds – the governing and accrediting bodies for U.S. medical, dental and veterinary schools coming up with such a scheme?!?! Of course not! Those men and women care about their true profession and how it is perceived by the public. They limit entry to those who have shown the skill and commitment to being in their particular field.

  16. I see getting rid of unnecessary test like LSAT and bar exam a move in the right direction. The practice of law is not rocket science, very easy for most folks, which is why a lot of it is passed off to admins/paralegal staff, law clerks, and certain higher position attorneys take credit for such work, as if their own.

    1. Making a very good living in the law is a dead letter, and has been for ten-fifteen years. Right now the law schools are desperately trying to ride out the silent on-going implosion of the legal industry, even though they would be better off quitting now.

  17. Status Monkey admitted that he went to an all boys prep school in Washington DC, and that he lasted only one semester.

    Status Monkey also said that he was contemplating donating 5K to the 2012 Virgil Goode Presidential Election campaign several times and on the Debbie Schlussel blog and at one point he even said he did so.

    Status Monkey the tattooed (by his own admission) racist troll is like a sleazy carney that teases all passers by with mean taunts into buying three tries to knock him from his platform and dunk him into a vat of water.

    Really though, all of us are amateurs and what is needed is a real computer expert that knows how to find a troll, and unfortunately, that is the province of the police and FBI, and/or private investigators that charge huge fees.

    But Status Monkey the racist troll will be found someday, and I hope he will be sorry for all of the upset that he has caused me and nando and Strelnikov, and all of the other commenters on the Debbie Schlussel blog that he has wildly attatcked with the help of Proxy servers such as the one owned by Michael Lavrik of Interserver in Secaucus, New Jersey.

    Poor Josh Adams is now as confused as can be, and compared to Status Monkey, Josh is a harmless and contrite fellow, and, as I have said so many times before, allowances must be made.

    I used to be mad at Josh, but by now I see that he is living through much the same as I have, and the thing that is very wrong about his experiences now is that his experiences now what with post graduate unemployment and devastation and non bar passage etc seem to be part of an unchanging and decades old trend.

    Nando and a few other pioneers before him have been correctly identifying all of this for about 5 years, and so far there is no change in the overall situation.

    Infighting has taken place, and the Ivy leaguers and first tier people have hijacked it all, and not me.

    Not me, because nando can delete all of my past, present, and future comments at will.

    But the law school scam argument becomes very thin when the HYS people start chiming in with their grievances, and, it is very hard to feel sorry for the HYS people that hang out on ILL and OLSS and I only wish I was lucky enough to have gone as far in the field as they have.

    But let us just call it all "First Tier Reality" and have done with it.

    They are the only people that havfe a say about anything anyway, including Campos and Merrit.

    The rest of us suck and are stuck in 3rd and 4th tier reality.

  18. Sorry, the spelling is: J: Kirkland Grant, and IMHO he taught nothing about contracts, and played the hide the ball game and smiled like a complete and first class bastard.

    When I finally listened to the excellent lectures on contracts by the Excellent Dan Fessler Professor, who actually fulfilled the role of teacher, my resentment for the disservice of J. Kirkland Grant was solidified.

    Especially because I used to bring a tape recorder to every class and then would transcribe the lectures.

    Oh what a scam.

    Dear God I am financially ruined and oh Dear God I knew nothing about politics, and I was once young.

    yes I was young like some of you, and I cannot do it all over again and all I can do is warn you about a law school scam.

    Oh dear God help us all.

    1. Painter, when was the last time that you made a student loan payment?

  19. Mr. Race Warrior @ 1105,

    You don't sound too bright yourself. I suppose you think Long Island is full of Jews. LOL, do you also call NYC "Hymietown" like that great intellectual Jesse Jackson? If only John Koch could sink his mandibles into THAT black booty! LOL, the Rev would be as white as a sheet once the Koch-roach got done with his booty. A used-up, dried-out husk.

    At any rate, the roach is no Jew. He self-identifies as "Catholic" - though I think we all know what deity it is that he really worships (hint: it's a butt!).

    And Koch is a German name, stupid. Not a "Jewish" one. But I suppose you also believe everyone from Germany (and Long Island) must be a Jew as well. Most German Jews actually adopted German names long ago; some of them even adopted BRITISH names - but you probably don't think "Jones" is a "Jewish" name, do you?

    Most Germans these days actually do worship black booty. They still have to atone for Hitler, after all. German women, anyway, seem to worship black penis. You certainly do.

    1. Amazing, your obsession with black men's body parts. The clinical definition of sadism. You're a sick one, all right. And you've never written a word against the law school scam. You don't belong here. You belong at a medium-security prison. That's what you've been fantasizing about all day and all night for years.

    2. You stupid knuckle-dragging racist. Jews are an ethnic group. Catholics are a religion. You obviously hate Painter's body because you hate and fear possible Jewish ancestry. Eichmann would be proud of you. And now we find out that you hate Germans as well. You're on a roll. Please keep posting to assist us in our investigation.

  20. 252,

    Why don't you help YOURSELF, Mr. Bootyroach?

    Become a janitor at Touro for 10 years - it qualifies for PSLF because it is a tax-exempt non-profit. On paper, at least.

    It's just manual labor. It won't, like, KILL you or anything. I realise you've never worked in your life, but I promise you, most employers don't guillotine the help. It'd be bad for business, and possibly even actionable. So just get a job for once in your life. Not some bullshit fantasy about being paid to watch YouTube videos all day - those jobs are a mirage. They only exist in your imagination.

    Become a janitor at Touro. If you tell them you're an alumnus-roach, you might be able to guilt them into hiring you.

    All this "Dear Booty help me, oh dear Booty I am ruined," etc. Is it THAT horrible to have to work for ten years? Will it hurt you THAT badly?

    And I'll bet Joshua Adams would be singing a different tune if YOU hadn't outed him, yes? He'd probably still be talking about the NCAA tournament and spraying the "n-word" all over this site. Didn't you say that you hated racism? It sure doesn't look like it, considering your continuing online bromance with that stupid dingleberry.

    Maybe HE should sue you for harming his job prospects. No, he's probably too fucking lazy to put forth the effort - he's kind of like you in that respect, isn't he?

  21. 653/705,

    "I'm a dedicated and courageous investigator who hunts down racists and Nazis on the Internet. It only makes sense that someone who hates and fears black people's bodies would also hate Jews. I think we've found our man."

    Good for you. BTW, when are you going to investigate Joshua Ray Adams, Brooklyn Law School Class of 2013, who leaves posts referring to
    college basketball players as "niggers?" I'm surprised that one isn't at the top of your list already, LOL.

    P.S. Far from "hating" Jews, anyone who (correctly) states that the lazy pile of shit John Koch ISN'T a Jew is obviously paying that group a compliment.

  22. P.S. for Joshua Adams the World-Traveling Law Student I mean World-Traveling Racist Hunter:

    People "hate Paint[roach]'s body" because all it does is transform other people's hard-earned money into Paint-turds.

  23. From

    Koch Name Meaning
    German and Jewish (Ashkenazic): occupational name from Middle High German koch, German Koch ‘cook’ (cognate with Latin coquus). The name in this sense is widespread throughout eastern and central Europe, and is also well established in Denmark. Czech and Slovak: from a pet form of any of several medieval personal names beginning with Ko-, for example Kochan, Kocián, Kojata, and Kosmas. Polish: nickname from kochac ‘to love’ (see Kochan).

  24. Mr. Ultimate Racist Hunter @1105/653/705/148,

    Give it up, dude. Nobody here except for you thinks that all German names are "Jewish." You're a fucking moron, and your decision to "double down" on your error only underscores that fact. Besides, the lazy lazy pile of shit named John Koch ***IS*** lily-white, and he does like to pretend that he is a "victim" of "anti-black" "racism." How exactly do your incompetent theories about "Jews" disprove that fact, again? Or do you think all Jews are "African-American" as well as "German?"


  25. Nando, I used to really enjoy this blog. But you have allowed it to be hijacked by nutcases, this despite the fact you moderate before posting. What a shame. This cite officially goes off my recommended site for those looking for information on going to law school.

    1. ^ You will be missed, Joshua Adams. At least this way you will be able to stop "vomiting" every time you see your own picture on this site.


    On January 13, 2011, Elie Mystal posted an epic ATL entry entitled “ABA Considers Dropping LSAT Requirement for Admission to Law School. ” Take a look at the following portion:

    “Really, it’s a good news/bad news kind of thing. The good news: the ABA committee reviewing the accreditation standards for law schools is starting to remember it has some power over how law schools operate. The bad news: the committee is contemplating a change that will only result in making it easier for schools to recruit any and all with the ability to pay (or go into debt), while at the same time gaming the U.S. News law school rankings.

    The latest brain nugget to come from the ABA is a proposal to remove the LSAT requirement for admission into law school. Currently, the committee requires prospective law students to take a “valid and reliable” test. But a number of schools already have a waiver so they can admit their own undergraduates without taking a rankings hit due to low LSAT scores. The new ABA proposal would simply drop the requirement altogether.

    I don’t think the LSAT is indicative of whole lot more than one’s ability to study for the LSAT. Being able to take standardized tests is an important skill — at least if you ever want to pass your state bar exam — but it’s not the only skill. From an educational standpoint, I don’t think it really matters if students have to take the LSAT or not.

    But given the proliferation of law schools more concerned about generating tuition dollars than preparing the next generation of lawyers, the LSAT exists as one of the few barriers to entry to a profession that is already overrun with applicants. Dropping the requirement is a move in the wrong direction that will only make it easier for diploma mills to churn out the next generation of unemployed, wage-depressing attorneys….”

    Mystal blasted the pigs in the snout on this point, more than three years ago. After citing a National Law Journal piece and quoting Cockroach David Yellen, he dropkicks these swine in their balls:

    “Is the LSAT the “only” way to figure out who should go to law school? No, of course not. Only people who base their sense of self-worth on their standardized test scores believe that the LSAT has any objective relevance to the question of whether or not a person will make a successful attorney.

    But Dean Yellen conveniently misses the crucial point: right now, the LSAT is the only way we determine whether or not a person is a good fit for law school. It’s the only thing we’ve got. For the ABA to take that away, replace it with nothing, and then talk about ensuring that “law schools are producing students who can enter the practice,” is a joke. That’s like saying “The Breathalyzer isn’t a very good tool for determining who is too drunk to drive. So now we’re going to let the drunks themselves decide whether or not they should be driving. Because what we really care about is whether or not people make it home safely.”

  27. Nando, I am a long-time reader of your blog and I want to congratulate you on going strong for nearly 5 years. I believe you have made a difference in exposing the putrid nature of law school and the avaricious motives which drive the law school deans, professors and administrators. The law students are merely collateral damage in their efforts to milk the federal student loan system while working a handful of hours per week.

    My only gripe with your blog is how JDPainter is allowed to highjack the comments section. I remember when you featured JDPainter's story and I felt bad for him. However, he is not a typical law school lemming. For starters, JDPainter enrolled in law school when jobs where plentiful. Even a grad from a lowly regarded school such as Touro could get a job as a lawyer in the '90s. I realize JDPainter didn't pass the bar exam but he only tried 3 times. There are people who take the bar exam 12 times or more before they finally pass. JDPainter simply gave up. He gave up on the law and his obligation to repay his student loans. JDPainter only owed $70K when he graduated law school. His debt ballooned to $350K because he defaulted early on and failed to make any effort to repay. People like JDPainter and Josh Adams are a Cancer to society. They drain the system and sponge off the spoils.

    I am not asking that you ban JDPainter but please moderate his comments. At outsidethelawschoolscam and Campos' former blog, they moderate his comments because it detracts from the general message. JDPainter clamors for attention. In the past, he has "threatened" to commit suicide, leave the internet, terminate his countless blogs, etc. He repeats the same damn stories. How many times have you heard the fucking "All-State" story. No wonder his wife left him. Nando, it's time to leave JDPainter before he destroys your blog.

    Take care.

    1. I'm with 9:59; the message of this blog is way too important to allow it to be hijacked by the infantile nonsense contained above. The message still matters; all this other stuff is dreck.

    2. I, too, have grown tired of JDPaintergy's idiotic drivel just as I am pretty sick of Mr. Insanity. They don't contribute much to this blog or society at large for that matter.

      However, just remember that both of these individuals are law school graduates. Anyone considering law as a future need not look any further than these two as proof that a law degree can be disastrous to one's physical, mental and financial well being.

      Kids, don't let law school ruin your future.

  28. @959,

    You fucking racist.

    JDPainter should get to post whatever the hell he wants on other people's blogs. If you don't liek it, you are a racist - and you hate black people.

  29. I hijack nothing, and I defaulted in 2008, which was 12 or so years after graduation.

    If you think taking the Bar exam 12X and then getting out there to represent the public as a lawyer is a good thing, then you are the sick one.

    I showed my grades, and my grades from law school made me really doubt my confidence in going forward in the path of being a lawyer.

    nevertheless I took the Bar exam 3x and my first score was around 415 and the second time was around 440. And the third was around a 550.

    And I want to frankly ask all members of the public if they would want to hire a lawyer that has taken the bar exam 12 times or 8 (as I witnessed one Touro grad do)

    I want to ask if that is doing a service pr a disservice to a client that is paying that lawyer good money to represent him or her?

    Maybe a lot of people are sitting in jail now that were represented by criminal defendants from lower tier schools?

    I think a lot of the readers here had grades in law school similar to mine, but just are not honest enough to post their law school transcripts.

    I remember going to see a lawyer and partner from a family firm that is a major donor to Touro and Hofstra, and he told me, and in his office, that he knew of a "Judge" that had taken the bar exam four times.

    And again I will ask the public: Would you want to appear before a judge like that, and accept his or her judgement?

    Nando never took the Bar exam, and so he didn't go through that aspect of it all.

    But I did.

    I hijack nothing.

    Anyway, Happy Father's Day to Nando, and to Josh Adams, who has the same debt I do, but who has arrived at that debt level in a much shorter time.

    Maybe someday law grads will get out of school with three quarters of a million dollars debt.

    If things keep going the way they are going, the surely will, and Campos and by that time Debbie Merritt will be living in waterfront homes on the Cote dAzur :)

    But if you think throwing 12X Bar passers into a hugely glutted lawyer job market is right and good, then that is your point of view, and as the old saying goes:

    "You can't argue with a point of view"

    Me? I think there is something terribly wrong when a law grad, three years into the works already, has to spend another six years at trying to pass the Bar Exam (as you zealously advocate for) and spend a total of 9 years in order to incompetently represent the public and in all likelihood fuck up and malpractice and/or put an innocent person in jail as a result of.

    And besides, you are making the large assumption that employment without bar passage will fund it all.

    What an anon shit you really are, and a coward and a shill.

    1. "If you think taking the Bar exam 12X and then getting out there to represent the public as a lawyer is a good thing, then you are the sick one.

      I showed my grades, and my grades from law school made me really doubt my confidence in going forward in the path of being a lawyer."

      In that case you should have dropped out after your first year.

    2. I suppose JD Painter was too dumb to see the writing on the wall after his first year grades.

      I have met many Touro law grads who passed the bar after failing multiple times. They later went on to have quasi successful careers doing real estate closings and tax returns on ISLIP or Mineola. Failing the bar exam is no excuse to quit, especially when you owe it to your creditors to repay them after they facilitated your 3 year vacation from reality.

      As for your question about hiring a lawyer who failed the bar exam 12 times, I will say this. I wouldn't hire a lawyer who graduated from Touro and passed the bar exam on his/her first try. But that's just me. I am sure a 12 time bar exam taker can do simple shit like plea their client out on traffic tickets and bullshit misdemeanors. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to file a PI case or a divorce complaint. JD Painter, you get an "A" for excuses.

    3. I think that Painter's excuses puts him in the same league as The Blues Brothers.

  30. @Paintroachie,

    So THAT's the problem. You are just generously looking out for the clients' quality of representation. You saint you. And here all this time I just thought that you HATE TO DO ANY FUCKING WORK. Boy, am I embarassed!

    1. Just when you think he can't come up with even more pathetic reasoning than the previous for his arguments.. BOOM! He does it.


  31. painter,

    when's the last time you made a payment on your student loans? 1998? 2000? Answer the question already.

    1. I think that he doesn't understand the question. Paying back the loan seems to be an alien concept to him. When you asked him when he made a payment on it, it is complete gibberish to him. For example, he hasn't paid this debt back, but he is mad that the bank won't give him a credit card so that he can go into more debt.

  32. My understanding of the ABA rule is this:

    Up to 10% of the class without an LSAT, but with another test scoring 85th percentile or above, from an undergraduate institution to that institutions law school, provided the GPA is high enough. Aimed at, if not restricted to, dual degree programs and the like.

    The ABA's rule is shot through with arbitrariness.

    Did they craft a wholly arbitrary rule that benefits some law schools and not others with the intent of being sued?

    Every stand-alone trash heap of law with seriously lagging enrollments wants this rule for themselves. Why can't they have it too?

    Let's take a minute to examine the arbitrariness of the rule:

    What is the rationale for extending the rule only to law schools attached to an undergraduate institution? I know it's allegedly for combined degrees, but why should those programs get special treatment?

    What is the rationale for requiring the applicant to have scored in the 85th percentile or better on the alternative standardized test? There is no "failing" the LSAT; no minimum LSAT score is required to get into law school. Requiring an 85th percentile or higher score rather strongly suggests that the LSAT and GMAT or what have you are not equivalent tests - that the "alternative" standardized tests are far easier to score well on than the LSAT. And indeed how did this equivalency and comparison between the LSAT and other tests come about? Is an 85th percentile GMAT score equivalent to a 120 LSAT score? What's going on here? It looks arbitrary.

    If "alternative" standardized tests are equally as predictive and difficult as the LSAT, why can only 10% of the class be admitted on such grounds? [Other than Rutgers already did it.] If the GMAT is a sufficient indicator of aptitude and sufficient quality control [ROFL] for the profession, then what in the world could justify limiting the alternative assessment to 10% of the class.

    I'm learning to look at this stuff with conspiratorial eyes.

    I think the ABA wants to get sued over this rule so that they have the cover of the judicial system for extending this rule to everyone.

    After all, the ABA has been sued for anti-competitive behavior before. Consent decree much?

  33. The entire law school scam situation and the entire student loan debt situation are many years already in the process, will take many years to be resolved.

    The best the mainstream media can do now is to talk about lowering interest rates for current students for current enrollees in higher ed, and the law school and student loan scams are taboo insofar as the mainstream media is concerned, and censored topics insofar as the well lobbied (As Alan Collinge once told me) media goes.

    If the whole economic situation collapses someday, then there will be a lot of frank and hindsight discussion and whistleblowing by the former beneficiaries from academia and the student lending system etc. and won't we all be ever so grateful then.

    Telling me I should have dropped out is like telling me that a quitter wins, and that a winner, who never quits, is a loser, (given the new reality of student lending and usury)

    I am heartsick and heartbroken to see Adams and his wife still featured on TTR, and I feel sick about maybe having something to do with further ruining the life of a little family somewhere, and all because I figured out who Adams was and then relayed it to Nando.

    A sort of Bohemian character and crank called Campos told me, and after my appeal to him, that I am fully responsible for the consequences of all of this, and I guess Campos was right.

    I am out of here and I will die with my debt, and the last stage of death is acceptance and according to Kubler Ross (who is dead as a mackerel now :) and look forward to the day when Status Monkey will be found.

    At least I can continue my sleuthing and my search for the Status Monkey, racist troll.

    Debbie Schlussel told me that she had deleted many of his comments, but at least I know a lot about him and have a lot of info to go on, and I will find Status Monkey.

    He went to an all boys prep school in Washington DC, and he seems to have donated 5K to the 2012 Virgil Goode Presidential campaign, and he also and very oddly had a lot of negative things to say about the U of Chicago on the Debbie Schlussel blog.

    He also collects and buys gold coins and I have some leads in that direction.

    He has used the "dingleberry" term so often that it had caused a couple of Debbie Schlussel commenters to wonder why, and he made a very similar comment about how anyone that voted for Obama, as I did, as "worshipping the Black Booty"

    Goodbye everyone. All we can do now is grow older and wait for at least a decade to see any change, and the change will come about through economic necessity and not through blogging, or political or any other kind of expressiveness, or through any kinds of appeals to politicians, as a well meaning and naïve Cryn tried to do.

    1. "Telling me I should have dropped out is like telling me that a quitter wins, and that a winner, who never quits, is a loser, (given the new reality of student lending and usury)"

      You quit taking the bar and quit paying on your loan. You told us that your grades were so bad that you had no confidence in your ability as a lawyer. You've already quit, the point is that you should have stopped after your first year when your grades were so bad. You didn't even make 2.0. It is the sunk cost fallacy, but this may be beyond your level of comprehension.

  34. You ARE responsible for harming Adams's career, you stupid butt-worshipping dingleberry.

    It's funny to watch you cry about harming one guy's career AT THE EXACT SAME TIME you are still trying to do the same thing to someone else.

    It's too bad you aren't anywhere nearly as committed to "sleuthing" for a FUCKING JOB.

    Happy hunting, you lazy turd. You will grow old and eventually die in poverty without ever satisfying your pea-brained vendetta against your critics. You will never learn who I am. Nobody besides you even cares. Have fun wasting your life "sleuthing," you lazy lazy cockroach. If you weren't fixated on your critics, you would have just wasted your life in some other way, such as oh I don't know WATCHING YOUTUBE 18 FUCKING HOURS PER DAY.

    Say hi to your victims I mean parents for me. And keep your promise and stop posting here!

  35. I would like to see moron painter actually stand behind his word and never post again. Shut the hell up and let this blog serve its purpose. Not yours. Thank you nando for your hard work.

  36. I wouldn't be so quick to make fun of CPAs. They actually do a decent job of limiting entry through the CPA exam. Few jobs advertise "no CPAs." It is possible to find a job without passing the exam.

  37. Eliminating the LSAT is to allow more Minorities in law school. The block minorities are having to enter law school is the LSAT.


Web Analytics