7:45 am -- way to get a jump on the day, Kash.

re item number 6:

women are so, so fickle. sheesh.

This post was made at 5:00 a.m. this morning in the Concord Law School thread. I do not believe it has received the attention it deserved, as I doubt anyone is still clicking on that thread. So, for your viewing (and commenting) pleasure, here you go:

The critics of Concord and online legal education generally haven't a clue what they are talking about. Concord graduates are generally not wet-behind-the-ears students but have an average age in the 40's and are already very successful in other fields - there are numerous MDs, PhDs, Profesors, etc. etc. There have been congressmen, world experts in various fields, and so on. Indeed, the thoughtless insulting comments left here indicate how clueless many B&M law school graduates must be! Concord graduates work damn hard, usually while holding down other full-time jobs - indeed, at least one graduate studied while deployed in the middle east while serving his country. It takes an incredible commitment and hard work to succeed at Concord and the standards required there are just as demanding as any other law school and if their students pass the Bar exam, why shouldn't they practice? There is so much self-aggrandizement from B&M graduates and their ignorance of Concord's methods and the quality of education received is all too apparent. I would suggest they actually meet with a few Concord alumni and find out the truth about them before they criticize.

I, of course, am a Concord graduate, indeed valedictorian July 2005. I studied every night until 2-3 a.m. , using the exact same hornbooks and casebooks as any other law school students, while working full-time and fostering and adopting multiple kids. Indeed, one of my classes was actually offered by Cornell Law School, for which I got an "A" grade, so I can only assume I achieved a typical Cornell "A" grade standard, despite only using a mouse (and the keyboard occasionally!)! My wife sacrificed so much to enable me to study and it frustrates me beyond words when I read the narrow-minded, self-important attitudes expressed in many of these comments.

As for Ross Mitchell, as someone who knows him personally, he is an incredibly intelligent man who would run rings around most attorneys.

So, my message to critical B&M law school graduates would be, grow up, and prove your law school is better by your work, not by slinging adolescent, imbecilic and groundless insults.

Ian Feavearyear J.D., B.A.

4 here, I should mention that I am not Ian Feavearyear. I simply clicked on the Concord thread this morning and saw his idiotic post and figured others would enjoy it as much as I did!

The question he failed to respond to: can you actually get a job with an online degree?

Are there female readers of ATL?

Elie! Do some investigative reporting on TTThio's manhands. There's a story in there somewhere.

6 - Sure, those on-line law firms are doing big business now that big law is dead.

4, I really don't think REALLY questions whether or not people from your online law school could be lawyers, I'm sure they can I mean law school doesnt teach you to be a lawyer anyway however you do miss out on a large number of programs and clinical type experience. That is beyond the point there are TOO MANY law schools already to asborb the number of lawyers coming out. The LAST thing the legal profession needs is an easy way to get a law degree from home. There are over 200 law schools in America, probably 100-150 too many, I don't think it is asking too much for people who want to be laywers to attend one of the already existing law schools. Yeah it might take more sacrifice on your part, but frankly, suck it up. No one is entitled to become a lawyer and we sure shouldn't be making it easier to become one in an already over over saturated market.

10 - In other words, you want to preserve your sense of superiority by limiting access to knowledge of the law. Get over yourself.

How does one perfect service on a genie?

I don't think you "perfect" service. You perfect a security interest. You effect service.

In any case, I think you rub process against the lamp for a while.

The U.S. has their "genie" cases, too. You guys have heard of these cases; if not:

http://ourforwardmovement.blogspot.com/2009/07/ghostbusters-legal-arm-taking-genie-to.html

I wonder what Kash is like. [sigh]

Nice zinger, 13.

13-In my state you "perfect" service. You can also perfect a security interest. Perhaps this is worthy of more research.

Thanks for the answer, though.

Hugs,
12

RE genie lawsuit:

Sounds ridiculous that some people believe in genies, right? (Their religion teaches it.)

Now consider how ridiculous YOUR religion sounds to them. Example: Some guy bleeds and that somehow makes up for your bad deeds (both past and future). Etc.

Takeaway: stop being superstitious. All of you. Just because millions of people believe in your superstition doesn't make it (or you) any less idiotic. Worse are the people who try to inflict their superstitious ideas on other people through legislation.

THINK, PEOPLE.

That is all.

18--the difference? try to find a case with someone suing the Holy Ghost

19, so you're saying that superstition is not idiotic as long as you don't sue anyone? Hmm.

Actually, I'd be happy if people would just keep their religion out of statutes/government (I'm looking at you, Utah).

But, since you brought it up, actually, "the Holy Ghost" does get sued (for assault): http://www.topix.com/forum/music/indie/TIPBUKSTCO35SMH1N (though a church is the proxy in this one)

God gets sued directly (and by a Nebraska legislator):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27201871/

Satan isn't overlooked:
U.S. ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and his staff, 54 F.R.D. 282 (W.D. Penn. 1971).

And I'm sure there are many other cases.

Now that that's settled, please, think...Don't just become superstitious because your parents are.

Quite the contrary, 18, I don't think it is ridiculous to believe in things unseen. What I do think is ridiculous is suing said unseen things. I believe in God, Christ, Angels, Demons, Heaven, and Hell. Yet, no matter how crappy my life got, it would never occur to me to involve the legal system. I am fully aware others who believe the same as I have done so, and I laugh and wonder what those people were thinking the same as I am doing with the present story.

I have thought on such "superstition" for a long time, and to me, it's a lot easier to believe that this world was created by an unseen higher power than to believe it happened by chance. If that's not the conclusion you reached, well, intelligent minds differ on all sorts of subjects all the time.

So, I'll keep my "superstition" and just continue on my way. You live your life, and I'll live mine. We'll all be happy, and buy the world Coca-colas and puppies. :)

21: Fair enough...in theory.

But, it becomes a problem when people make decisions that affect others based on their own religion. For example:

- Making laws based on religious beliefs.
- Choosing a political candidate based on religion.

You may not see the problem with that. I bet you would if you lived in certain Middle Eastern countries that have laws based on religion. It's not fun to have someone else's beliefs imposed on you.

21 -

I find this confusing: If a higher power was necessary to create the world, who created the higher power?

Was it just always there? If so, why could the world not just always be there, too?