Monday, October 5, 2015

It's time for some more Donation Request Letters



Ah, the law school donation letter.  Even though the recipient generally has no idea who the person is writing the letter, the letter is so warm and chummy, as from an old friend, that one can't help but respond (or so they hope).  So, so "You're part of the club," if you will.  So, so anecdotal as well; it worked for me, so I KNOW it worked for you, too, right, because if a=b and b=c, then obviously a=c.  Regardless of the actual data of thousands of graduates.  Yet, it would be embarrassing not to donate, because clearly you are doing great, and if you're not...oh...well...oh, dear...awwwwkwarrrrrd.  Nothing like Victorian-style peer pressure to get one to part with a few bucks.

Names have been removed to protect the innocent, but note the reference to the class of '92, for starters.  Unless the author was a non-traditional student, this puts the author's birth date at 1967, plus or minus.  This person is early, early Gen-X if not a late, late Boomer, depending on where one chooses to draw the line.  In any event, a gulf of 23 years lies between this person's experience and that of someone today, and I think it is a relatively safe position to say that a few things happened in-between then and now.  Shills and/or trolls will beg to differ, just, well, because.

"I knew in 6th grade I wanted to be a lawyer."  One questions the wisdom of opening with an appeal to special-snowflake-syndrome, but perhaps this desire was genuinely true.  Sadly, it was also genuinely true for many, many others as well, whose careers fell apart or failed to launch.  Further, claiming that a previously-known-as-fourth-tier law school was an "easy choice" when planning one's career, even in the early 90s, tacitly nods to some highly personal and idiosyncratic circumstances that not all can lay claim to.

Moving on from generalized platitutes about from the greatness of the people, and the environment, and "exciting times," I am impressed that author actually goes there and briefly nods to "challenges" as well.  Garnering Top Students, when the smart-money is turning away from law school.  Competing for Outstanding Faculty, when many faculty and staff seem unconcerned about the plight of their students at best and shameless shills at worst.  "How to continue sending grads out into the world..." when the market is abysmal and signalling that it needs no more JDs at this time, thanks, due to steady over-production of JDs for decades.

Also, as we continue to hear again and again, tuition dollars don't cover everything.  The natural response is, "why not?"  Tuition has outpaced inflation at a two-to-three times percentage rate for decades.  The faculty needs yet additional "support?"  The curriculum has changed THAT much?  O Rly?  Law Review and Moot Court are more expensive all of a sudden?  What about previous endowments - do they not serve to smooth things out during lean times?  I guess learning to "think globally" isn't cheap, and requires a three-year degree on top of prior education, apparently, all borne by the student.

While it is indeed wonderful (truthfully, sarcasm /OFF) that the author has found that legal education has returned tremendous economic and psychic benefits, I would wager a substantial sum (sarcasm /ON) that there are other alumni who feel very differently.  While I cannot speak for all of them, and while I don't mean to pick on Valpo only (because this letter can easily serve as a proxy letter from law schools all across this country), the evidence from the economy, struggling graduates, recognized news media and scamblogs of all stripes indicate that many, many graduates are not receiving said benefits for their similar efforts.

All this would suggest that the "gift of whatever amount makes sense for you," in 2015 dollars for today's recent graduates, is easily answered:  zero.

44 comments:

  1. I'm class of '92. That class actually graduated into an employment catastrophe (not quite like '08, but approaching.) There had been a bust in BigLaw and MidLaw in '91 and many people saw offers withdrawn, etc. The market did not recover until 1994-5, by which point the legal career of those of '92 that had not got hired, or had offers withdrawn was ****ed. And yes, I was in a top tier school.

    But here is the point. We received no help worth mentioning looking for jobs - indeed what graduates of 2008-15 see is light years ahead of what we got (but still crap) - we were lucky to see the steam off the professors and placement offices' sh¡t. The day we graduated though, we started getting requests for donations to the class of '92 fund - this from schools that had, at least in my case, sent me a 6¢ bill with a 22¢ stamp - fees, charges, you name it, we got it (we also got bills about 1 week before commencement with a threat if we did not pay them, no graduation, mine was I think a little over $3.) They did nothing to help us looking for jobs but showed up immediately looking for money. As for placement - especially as mid-level lawyers, few of us would engage the school - we discovered the placement office leaked job openings like a broken steam valve, and the JD in the placement office was not above calling her classmates!

    There has been a bit of a change in their approach to alumni lately - they try a little to get us to network with the current students - not as hard as they look for money, but hey priorities, priorities!! And the networking requests - come to the pizza night with the class of '18, meet 'n greet, etc. etc. - crass to say the least.

    But here is the thing, when any law school then started to try to engage mid-level and senior partners in its job placement efforts, it ran into a problem. You know the expression, "what goes around comes 'round?" Well as far as the class of '92 was concerned nothing had "gone 'round," so there was not "comin' round" to do. No law profs had helped us when we were looking, the placement office had been if anything counter-productive, what call did they have on the graduates of the 80s and 90s for anything? We owed them nothing, or at least what they had done for us (steam off you know what.) Notice how little we donate now - by the way, I'm sure the oughties and teens will donate less.

    One more cliché, "you sow what you reap."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it is pretty hard going to one of these "networking" events and immediately being approached by desperate looking second and third year law students.

      I would neve hire anyone from my Toilet: even if I was in a position to hire someone, I would hire an elite LS grad with practice experience. The hiring process for employers at all levels is a wet dream; hordes of qualified, desperate prople willing to work for pennies. It is not like that in many other fields that I know of.

      Even worse than that is being a student at one of these events. There are always a few Asperger-type gunners dressed up in suits. They're socially awkward, but desperate and this leads to some incredibly strained "conversations."

      Me, I just tried to get as drunk as quickly as possible and pocket as much free shrimp as I could. Once, I spotted an alum I had interviewed with and reminded him how he had rejected me. I made him really uncomfortable and he
      took off right away.

      Delete
    2. Or, as L4L put it in his blog Big Debt, Small Law:

      [...]Or there’s the “networking” farce, where you print reams of resumes on that creamy, ivory cotton-weave Staples resume paper and shove them in the face of every gray-haired loser at an alumni cocktail reception. I attended one of these once, and the first older-looking guy on the scene was gang-rushed and sent to the hospital as a horde of recent grads bum-rushed him with an avalanche of cover letters! I believe he was pronounced dead shortly thereafter, having choked on a peel-and-eat shrimp during the melee. I later learned he wasn’t even a lawyer, but instead a catering director merely there to inspect the buffet. Such are the risks one runs when overseeing events for desperate law school grads. Just posting a craigslist ad for an entry-level lawyer is like strolling into Ethiopia with a box of Dunkin’ Dounuts and saying: “Hey, anyone here got the munchies?”

      (Thank whatever gods exist for the wayback machine, as L4L had already departed well before I discovered the scamblog movement.)

      Delete
    3. Here is the thing - if your practice is going well (or it is tech) no one wears a suit - I went to a VC meeting today in dad jeans (LL Bean) a polo and Aigle raincoat - one of my partners had to be told not to wear bicycle shorts to the office - suits are for court, or interviews.....

      Alumni events - sodomise me with a cactus. Desperate law students, f^ck no! Law profs - sodomize them with a 2x4, splinters included. Why do you go to those functions? The profs are all trying to balance being condescending with hints that they might be useful as an expert in [name horseshit area of "research" here] and by the way, ummm, you know, a little of counsel work too - where they expect to be paid more than a senior partner for a report filled with tendentious garbage and self citations! In the odd moment they hint at hiring one of their students, backhanded.y, while appologising for how moronic there current students, the ones this event is supposed to get a job (or at least summer p) for are "would never have been admitted in '88 or '89 but what can you do (and you you dumb fu*ck didn't make it into,Yale like me, I could'da been you, hell I'mbetter than you - millions of dollars better, but I chose the life of the mind, you mercenary pr!ck, sellout ..." "Did I tell you how sad I am that you chose not to do public interest".)

      And somehow the poor desperate bbbbb bbaaaastttttarrddddds that are their current victims get your contact details - you should have been nice about that offer to help on your current matter (fzkd!) and the poor little sh!ts keep calling and calling - and your receptionist gets sad and runs out of reasons you won't take the call, and she quits because she ran out of excuses.

      Delete
    4. Maybe I should try going to one of my school's networking events. I remember that at the last "Career" fair my school held, there was exactly one firm collecting resumes. Surely that leaves room for me to stomp on in there with my steel toes and Carhartts. I'll put up a booth, set up a banner, the works! And I pay my workers ACTUAL MONEY! Hot damn, I can probably get Law Review.

      Delete
    5. I graduated from a second-level(that's putting it politely) law school in the 80s. Our placement office made it clear to all students that if you weren't in the top 10-25%(private firms/govt) you were not, under any circumstances, to even Apply for an on-campus interview As in, if you put your resume in the pile, they would throw it out and then find you and lecture you that you weren't allowed to apply(yes, this happened to me). My law school at least waited six months before sending out $$$ request letters. What's your guess on whether I have contributed all these many years?

      Delete
    6. "The market did not recover until 1994-5"

      Speaking as someone who graduated from law school in 1995, the market still hadn't fully recovered at that point. It was a lot better than it was in '92 -- the bottoming out point was probably either '92 or '93 -- but it didn't get back to something you could call "normal" until about 1997. Actually, if "normal" is defined as what it was like in 1990, it probably never got back to normal. The growing oversupply over time made sure that couldn't happen.

      "(not quite like '08, but approaching.)"

      Let's put it this way: there was no point between 2008 and [any year in the 1992-96 range] in which the market was worse than it was in [any year in the 1992-96 range]. In a good year in the '90s or '00s, the percentage of law school grads finding full-time, permanent legal work was around 75-80%. In recent years, the percentage has been around 50-55%. In 1992, it was probably around 65%.


      Delete
    7. This is actually somewhat interesting. What you can take from this is that law schools and law professors have no credit to draw on with most of those graduates who are in the profession, even the ones in their 50s (classes of the late 80s to 90s.)

      And why is fund raising so hard? Why is it tough for them to place graduates?

      First they nickelled and dimed their students between the 80s and the 00s - and those students-now-alumni, feeling they already paid through the nose for what they got, are not very inclined to donate now. Second, they did pretty well nothing to help those students-now-alumni get jobs in the 80s to 00s, so they have no favours to call in when trying to place students now. Third, the law professors and fundraisers cannot even seem to approach these former students-now-alumni with a simple "give one of our current students a break" request, without engaging in self serving "but first give me a consulting gig/of counsel role," or "can we have a contribution to the making law professors comfortable fund?" Fourth, the radiant disdain that the professors have for the legal-practitioner-alumni, either because they are:

      (a) not academics (just a superior species all around);

      (b) did not go to Yale/Harvard/Chicago (like the prof);

      (c) because they sold out and went into practice instead of public interest.... and by the way, professors think that being a law-professor is in fact a public interest jobs, that they are teaching when they could have gotten millions, accepting poverty level wages from their law school!

      Delete
    8. I graduated from a second tier dump in 1993 and can vouch for the fact that the job market was terrible. If you weren't in the top of the class and lacked connections, you were in big trouble. Career services was completely useless. It took me a full year to find a legitimate legal job, and I only got that job through to a family connection. To the extent that I harbor any feelings toward my law school, they are negative. I've never donated a dime to the place and I never will.

      Delete
  2. It taught me how to think globally.

    The closest a modern-day Valpo grad will get to "international" law is, if they're LUCKY, litigating a slip-and-fall for an illegal-immigrant Mexican roofer who tripped and fell off the roof of an International House of Pancakes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By the way, what is international about the International House of Pancakes? Can't be the distribution of their outlets: I've seen a couple of them in Canada but nowhere else outside the US. As for the food, are we expected to believe that boysenberry syrup is a traditional comestible of the Trobriand Islands?

      Delete
    2. OG, they have some restaurants in Canada (And a handful in the Middle East). They have stores in more than one nation; that is enough for them to call themselves "international". Additionally, it is probably "international" enough so that law schools can claim that a graduate working as an IHOP server is working in "international business".

      Delete
    3. Yes. And serving coffee makes one an "expert in the marketing of imported commodities".

      Delete
    4. Commiserating with the Mexican janitor about your wages will be described as "analyzed mobile labor conditions and international wage competitiveness." Slipped on spilled maple syrup? "Conducted impromptu, on-site inspections of environmental conditions." Gave a truckdriver a handjob in the handicapped stall (Gotta get food money somehow)? "Used entrepreneurial spirit to create side-business targeting recreational needs of interstate businessmen."

      Delete
    5. You guys need to rewrite my resume for me.

      Delete
  3. My shitbag law school is run for the benefit of the faculty and will never see a penny from me. The only thing I would mail them is a box filled with excrement, which has more economic value than my worthless diploma and law license.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least with shit, you can grow some pretty flowers. I'm not sure if a law degree is even bio-degradable or can be made into compost.

      Delete
  4. Each time I get the donation letter, I fantasize about shredding my law school diploma and sending it back to them.

    You think they'd get the hint?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I knew in 2nd grade I wanted to be a Super Hero. I knew in 3rd grade I wanted to be a Martian, and in 4th grade, I wanted to join the Circus. I knew in 5th grade I wanted to be an inventor, so I could invent see-through-clothes glasses.

    Yes, early childhood visions are great indicators of the way ahead.

    I knew in 6th grade I wanted to be perpetually underemployed and hold a degree with a steadily eroding value. By 7th grade, I knew I wanted to be the butt of lawyer jokes and despised by my neighbors. By 8th grade, I knew I had to have a drinking problem and all the damaged relationships that entails. By 9th grade, I knew I needed be in debt to be happy. Deeply in debt. Debt with high interest. Non-dischargeable debt.

    The State wouldn’t let me get a Drivers’ License until I was in 10th grade. And even then, Mom had to beside me in the front seat.

    Years later, when it came time dive head-first into the deep end of the empty swimming pool called professional education, South Harrisburg Institute of Technology and Law (“SHIT-Law”) was the obvious choice.

    And what a great choice it was. SHIT-Law allowed me to fulfil my grade-school dreams. Ok, not the Super Hero, Circus, or Inventor ones.

    The people at SHIT-Law were great. No, actually they were Spectacular. God yes, the people! Let me tell you about The People. Never before had I been engulfed in a rising tide of overambitious, over-achieving, back-stabbing special snowflakes who were all in earnest pursuit of the unattainable. I made friends for life. I beat them up when I was intoxicated, thanks to my drinking problem. I sabotaged their laptops. And the profs. They claimed to be engaging in Socratic dialogue when in reality they were actually geeks trying hard to match the drill sergeant in “Full Metal Jacket.” That was fun. And they worked real hard to get the grades posted timely.
    Yep, the people were absolutely spectacular.

    And yes,SHIT-Law allowed me to fulfil my grade-school dreams. I’m perpetually underemployed after a two-year career at a mid-to-small-law firm where I bottomed for some junior partners who treated me like the profs back at school. I’m in debt and I drink to mask the pain.

    But hey, enough about me. I’m writing to ask you to help put dear alma mater raise some scratch. SHIT-Law is facing challenges, like declining enrolment, stagnant faculty entitlement to underfunded pensions, serious challenges to our relevance and importance in the modern legal profession.... and did I mention declining enrolment? Yeah, all these challenges can be quickly and permanently solved with your money. You see, we didn’t bilk you enough in tuition. SHIT-Law needs your money, and we needed it yesterday.

    Wait...... Asking you for money is probably like asking you to flap your arms and fly.

    You see, law school so damaged my ability to think rationally that I am asking a fellow law graduate for money .... to donate to ... a law school. ?!?!? As Learned Hand said in his dissenting opinion in Meyers v. Strokemeoff, 666 U.S. 191, 202 (1918), “WTF?”

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I knew in 6th grade I wanted to be a lawyer. Years later, when it came time to select a law school, the Valparaiso University School of Law was an easy choice."

    Because your dumb ass didn't get into any other law school. Even Cooley turned you down. Admit it.

    Valpo Law "taught me how to think globally".

    How, exactly? Can you even define "thinking globally"?

    "But the best thing about Valpo Law was the people."

    Oh, of course. The People™. Veritable princes, one and all. Salt of the mother-fucking earth. Just about every other law school in the US easily surpasses Valpo's median LSAT score of 145 (the 26th percentile of all test-takers), but not a goddamn one of them has People™ like Valponians (Valpo-ites? Valpoids?).

    "I've run into Valpo Law grads in California"

    Along the highway, while they were holding up a sign reading "WILL WERK 4 FUDE".

    "and I've run into them on a boat in the middle of the ocean"

    Deck hands pretending to litigate for dolphins.

    "These are exciting times at Valpo Law. There's a new curriculum"

    Oh, how very exciting. Pardon me while I yawn.

    "But we also face some challenges: How to attract top students."

    Yes, that's a challenge, no doubt. And I face the challenge of becoming concertmaster for the London Philharmonic.

    "How to continue sending grads out into the world who are really excellent lawyers and great people, too."

    When was the last time that Valpo sent even one "really excellent lawyer" out into the world?

    "I used to think tuition dollars covered everything. They don't."

    Christ on a crutch! Valpo can't operate on FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR from each student? Why the fuck not? Just exactly how much money does it take to run a toilet that makes Cooley smell good in comparison? Hell, one could hire private tutors for a lot less than $40k per year! Ah, but then one would miss those glorious Valponian People™.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I used to think tuition dollars covered everything. They don't."

      Translation: "We've had to heavily subsidize tuition to attract a few students with LSAT scores above 150, but we're entirely unwilling to fire any faculty or administrators to make up for the reduction in revenue. F*** you, give us money."

      Delete
    2. When was the last time that Valpo sent even one "really excellent lawyer" out into the world?

      I recall hearing about exactly one successful Valpo grad. He graduated top of the class and got a job at a Chicago BigLaw outfit. The only reason I know of him is that there is a divorce case concerning him. See, he was supported through law school by his wife, who I believe paid his living expenses and tuition. The moment he started work at the firm, he dropped her like a sack of dogshit. Hence the divorce case. Really excellent people.


      "But we also face some challenges: How to attract top students."

      Yeah, and I face the challenge of choosing which Victoria's Secret model I need to kick out of bed each morning. "Adriana, you have to go. There's just not enough room here for all of us." It's not fun, but these kind of choices must be made,

      More seriously, the only way Valpo can "attract" top law students is by offering to pay their Yale Law tuition.

      Delete
  7. Nothing to add except a "ditto me" to all of the above experiences. But I do want to say that I'm impressed with the comments today. Any dopey fucker thinking of attending law school should have this as required reading. Most of them don't understand the resentment held by law graduates who got fucked by their law schools - even decades ago - and who owe their alma mater absolutely nothing. Even the successful grads are probably successful despite the efforts of the law school, not because of. So throwing resumes at those grads with reasonable practices and who are making an income from law is likely to just be a total waste of paper. The law school fucked them just as hard, and there's a certain sense of pleasure in tossing back a little karma.

    ReplyDelete
  8. These bitches and hags never stop trying to take from students and graduates. They are shameless pigs. The cockroaches also temporarily hire undergrads and law students to make the sales calls. If this happens to you, make damn sure to let those young people know that the law school is a big, steaming pile of dog excrement that will FINANCIALLY CRUSH them - and will not improve their employment prospects.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Below is the text of a solicitation e-mail I once got from my Toilet:

    Chicago-Kent is well worth it, [your name here].
    At Chicago-Kent, you transformed from an eager applicant, to a hardworking student, to an accomplished professional. Chicago-Kent prepared you.
    Your time at Chicago-Kent was well worth it.
    While you attended Chicago-Kent, our committed faculty challenged you each day. Law school may have seemed overwhelming at times, but your effort and ambition pushed you to succeed.
    It was well worth it.
    Your legal education was enhanced by the financial commitment of Chicago-Kent alumni who gave to the Annual Fund. Gifts to the Annual Fund provide our students scholarships, access to top faculty and career opportunities.
    Giving back is well worth it.
    Make a gift today. [insert name here], it's well worth it.

    I think someone had to be taking the piss, as the Brits say. "Well worth it" is repeated at least 4 or 5 times. Had to have been an angry underemployed law school grad writing that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As someone who looks at annual giving solicitations for a living, that letter is a piece of garbage if I've ever seen one. The trash pit probably lost more than a couple dollars on that one.

      Delete
    2. The repetition of "well worth it" reflects the poverty of the author's vocabulary.

      So, 10:02, are you "an accomplished professional"? If so, does Chicago-Kent deserve the credit?

      Care to describe the "access to top faculty" and "career opportunities" that you have enjoyed because you went to Chicago-Kent?

      Delete
    3. Gifts to the Annual Fund provide our students scholarships, access to top faculty and career opportunities.

      Provided that the Annual fund provides their students with scholarships to Harvard Law, I'm OK with them claiming "access to top faculty and career opportunities". That is what they meant, right? Guys?

      Delete
    4. I'm 10:02 Old Guy.

      I am not allowed to consider myself an accomplished professional. As Judge Wolfson at my Chicago-Kent orientation sternly reminded me, "only Doctors and Lawyers are professionals." So my dead-end JDadvantage job does not count. I work hard, save money and do quality work but I'm never going to be affluent, not in the way I thought from looking at the blatantly false employment statistics published by C-K in 2004.

      And C-K does not deserve credit. In fact, any success I have had after law school has been in spite of the law degree, not because of it. I was rejected during the job interview process because of the JD. I was explicitly told they did not want to hire me because "You are a lawyer."

      My understanding of the RAP and the limits of federal jurisdiction did not help me when I sued my landlord in small claims court. The thousands I spent on required courses like Business Organizations did not help when I was applying to Lowes for an Associate position. About the only classes that have the slightest relevance to real practice were taught by underpaid adjuncts.

      As far as "access to top faculty." Hmm.... There were the times I went to see professors during office hours to ask questions and was brushed off with contempt because I was not in the top 5%. I recall one professor in particular leaned back in his chair, put his hands on his pendulous gut, and told me that "A students make good law professors, B students make good judges and C students make good money." The implication being that I shouldn't worry. All this said as one side of his mouth curled up in a somewhat obvious sign of contempt.

      Of course, I did see a lot of "top faculty" walking around their neighborhoods in the tony suburbs north of Chicago. And I do recall doing some housework for another "top faculty member." Does that count?

      Let's see ... "access to career opportunities...."
      Do you mean the C-K job board, which is pretty much limited to those in the top 3%, or those with Biglaw experience and political connections? Do you mean the vast network of C-K alumni scratching out a living in the Chicago suburbs, desperately hoping they can make their next rent payment? Yeah, I'll turn to them for "networking opportunities" and referrals. I'm sure they are turning away wealthy and famous clients all the time! I'm sure Micheal Jordan wants a C-K lawyer to help sell his house or to negotiate his Nike deals.

      Delete
    5. C-K is a scammy dumpster fire.

      Delete
  10. Why did you withhold the identity of the person who "wrote" this letter? Shills should be held accountable.

    ReplyDelete
  11. How timely, because I just found this article...
    https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2015/08/21/what-presidents-really-mean-when-they-write-alumni-essay
    Everyone get a laugh out of this one!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice. And true.

      But if I'm being honest about my undergraduate institution, they did give me a damm fine STEM education, top ranked in 1994, and I have recovered my B.S. education investment in spades. I started in 1995 at 44,000 per year and after that it was up to me how well I did. total cost per year of my undergrad was about $7000/year and well worth it.

      Not so my law school tuition dollars, which shall follow me to my grave.

      Delete
    2. 5:37, I feel the same way. My undergrad institution provided a good education at a good price. Professors were engaged, the campus was practical, I had the resources I needed and opportunities to succeed. A fair deal for everyone concerned.

      My law school was the opposite; a shitty and useless education for a medical school price. Fake prestige everywhere, like one of those suburban housewives flaunting her "wealth" and "class" by driving a new Suburban with silver trim and carrying the cheapest designer handbag with those fucking logos all over it.

      Those with true prestige and class don't need to flaunt it by endlessly ramming how amazing and prestigious they are. My undergrad didn't bang on about its prestigious top class faculty. They were just good at their jobs, and that's all that was needed.

      And while I'm ranting, I despise those law professors who justify their shit teaching by telling us that we're better off getting Cs because C students make all the money while A students get jobs as professors.

      Actually, I despite all law professors, every single one of whom knows - deep down - that they are fucking students over. Oh well. Karma does work. We just have to sit tight.

      Delete
    3. Ditto for me as well, 5:37 and 2:59.

      Delete
    4. This whole thread has really renewed my anticipation of some pretentious ninth-tier shithole of a law school closing down. Hofstra, John Marshall, USF, something like that. I would love to watch the faculty parking lot on the day they're all laid off.

      Delete
    5. I wish it would happen but the supply of Lemmings is endless, and as long as those Federal dollars keep flowing, all the Toilets have to do is trim the fat. We all know that law professors are as employable as ice salesmen at the south pole. These rats will protect their sinecures like the cornered rats they are.

      Delete
  12. Actually, if we're on the topic of those irritating give-us-money beg-a-thons, anyone mind if I share something from my own "scamma mater" RWU? I've wanted to share something about them ever since I saw this blog's post this past April, the one warning people to "talk to your children about law professors"...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By all means share it.

      If my school ever calls me for money, the resulting stream of colorful profanity will make a sailor blanch.

      Delete
    2. I'd love to read it. Keep this thread going a little longer. Makes for better archives too.

      Delete
    3. Whenever my school calls, I just ignore it; every member of my family does it with their respective schools. Do schools have to do the "Do Not Call" list thing too? Honest question.

      Anyway, I wanted to share this with you folks at OTLSS...
      http://rwu.edu/sites/default/files/flipbooks/presidentsreport/presidentsreport13-14/index.html#12
      First, let me just say that this is not intended to be a slam against either student featured here or to detract from their successes or downplay their struggles, but to show how scummy RWU (with its law school) has become. That being said...
      Let's take a look at it. First, notice the big-ass blurb right there spouting "Access to Justice", the tagline of all law schools nowadays. Now look at the two students themselves: They're both female, one is LGBT while the other is part of a non-white minority, and the former claims to have endured discrimination and pain as a result of her sexual orientation while the latter had to raise a child all by herself. (They're hitting quite a few Politically Correct points here, aren't they?) And, again, not to detract from their successes or downplay their struggles, but notice the marketing forces at work here: It seems to be saying "A law degree from RWU made my life all better!"

      And give me enough time, folks, but I'll look for some articles within the past year boasting about how much money RWU raised for the law school and how they're "expanding their presence" or something like that...

      Delete
  13. I wouldn't even donate a bored-at-eleven-in-the-morning ejaculation to my law school, even if the dean's wife had her mouth poised and ready to receive, followed by sucking the residue out of my urethra and licking my glans clean.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have too much time on your hands.

      Delete
    2. That reminds me of the vile, filthy post that Brian Leiter made on his "philosophy" blog to protest the Salaita case.

      Delete