Disagree with the chart. T3 grads definitely not as bitter as lower ranked T-14 schools. At least not SLS and YLS. And 2nd tier schools have extremely high bitterness if not ranked in top 20%.

Law school changes people -- it's that simple. If you think you've stayed the same, take a good, hard look at yourself and your lifestyle now, and then look at yourself and your lifestyle 4 years ago.

I told you so.

For those that haven't seen it, here is a good documentary about the first year transition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8ABhatAfsA

I must preface this post with I WAS NOT A MARIN FAN AND/OR APOLOGIST (prior to this post)!

But this is funny and actually, pretty accurate, which makes it even funnier.

Bravo, Marin. May your subsequent posts enlighten us all...

First to say the PE is overdue with a long, unfunny comment about how it's all Obama's fault. Wassamatter, PE, too hung over from a long night at Rick's? I, for one, am on the edge of my seat. And I agree, this story was pretty funny. Points to Elie for the LOTR reference, as well. Yes, I'm a geek.

Depressingly accurate

To be fair, the bitterness quotient has as much to do with where you were as where you are going. Older students (which means a measly two years out at most schools) enjoy a different economy of bitterness. You can escape the whole mess of it by understanding outright that your excessive law school fees are, at best, an unlocking of the door to that power fantasy that couples vast income with high society in a gorgeous urbane townscape... and at worst a welfare lottery in Trenton, NJ. It's all what you make of it.

My advice to the bitter school children is to network. Your GPA and law school can only help so much in this economy--and it's precious little. Meanwhile, a mediocre student with laughable undergrad credentials that spends time working events and bar association initiatives during law school has a rolodex (that's like an address book :) of relevant recommendations that were forwarded directly to appropriate partners. (That means they never felt the wintery purgatory of the hiring partner's candidate inbox or the HR's auto-rejector.)

Referencing Anne Frank for a punch line to your pathetic response? I guess ATL couldn't help but shed whatever dignity it had left.

Shouldn't it be Galadriel, not Celeborn?

Here's what gets to me:

I can (and do) understand that law school changes people. But why don't equally (or more) difficult things cause the excessive bitterness?

For example, med students don't seem to get bitter. They get tired and stressed, but they don't seem to change much. My friends who are doing Masters (and one phd) in engineering just seem busier, but not bitter.

What makes law school so bitter?

I believe the correct word is cynical, not bitter.

Yea. Law school is tooootally a worse option then i-banking, going to war, working in a steel mill, becoming a garbage man, or finding a job.

GOd we're so ooopppressed. We soooo justifiably bitter.

Nice perspective. GO kill yourself.

To suggest that although "neither vicious persecution nor death could crush Anne Frank’s spirit," there is a possibility that if she had attended law school it could is disgusting and completely inappropriate. Yes, law school is rough but get over yourself. Have the sensitivity to leave Anne Frank out of it.

YLS students are not bitter.

HLS students are medium bitter due to the YLS rejection, but generally happy due to the ease of picking up hot MIT coeds by dropping the H-bomb at sweet Cambridge bars.

SLS students are just a tad bit bitter about not getting into Yale, but they prefer the west coast, so whatever, dude.

CLS students are bitter as hell after being rejected from the top 3 and having to settle for the prestige of Columbia while living next to Harlem.

NYU students are likewise bitter about being rejected from the top 3 and, in many cases, CLS, but the bitterness is mitigated by their surroundings.

Chicago students are killself bitter due to the recent and ongoing destruction of value of their degrees, and having to suffer through so much rigor for no real benefit.

Penn students are very bitter, mainly because it's one of the few schools where the B-school is more prestigious than the law school, but more recently because the Philly legal market has disappeared.

Michigan students were killself bitter for a few years, but now that their football program is once again the best among the T14, they are merely very bitter.

Virginia students are foolish enough to believe having the greatest softball/popped collar tradition among all law schools gives them something to live for even though they can't get jobs anymore, so they are not that bitter.

Berkeley students are the most bitter of all students, because trees are being cut down all around them and gays can't marry.

Duke students are extremely bitter that they didn't go to UNC - still would've had zero job prospects, but at least could've rooted for a successful basketball program.

Northwestern students are somewhat bitter about being surrounded by old people, but generally happy with their location and their choice not to suffer through the rigor of UChicago.

Cornell students are not really bitter, because they long ago realized that they have no reason to live.

Georgetown students are not really bitter, since they all were lucky to squeeze into the T14 and most of them still believe T14 means something.

As a 3L now, I can say that there has been a shift in attitude amongst the students from first year to this year. Things are a lot more serious/ depressing around school this year than in the previous two years. People are visibly more stressed. It is not a fun time to be a law student.

I think our Jewish brethren should not be ridiculed especially during their holy days. Most uncalled for.

Bravo, Marin. This is the kind of in depth, substantive analysis (replete with impressive looking graph) we need. The phenomenon of law school curdling the soul is one that warrants extensive further study. (Perhaps "soulcurdling" could be a future parameter in a broader assessment of the deliterious effects of legal education vis a vis personhood?)

I am also encouraged by the accuracy of graphical representation. Although I would describe myself more as "ridiculously bitter," I feel "extra bitter" must certainly fall within one standard deviation.

This sort of thing makes me glad of how blissfully ignorant I was as a law student. I was at a T30 public (and relatively cheap) law school, getting grades in the top of my class (starting out in the top-10 overall as a 1L, and slowly declining from there), and if you asked me about Vault rankings, I would've thought you were talking about bank security. I looked at it as my last chance to work less than 40 hrs/week, 50 weeks/year and to look disheveled on a daily basis-- hell, I enjoyed it.

Of course, lucking into a very nice federal job via OCI probably isn't the most repeatable of career paths, so actually preparing for interviews and the like might be a good idea. And this was '03-'06, before the current legal employment difficulties.

Awesoeme post (I'm not Marin or Elie). I do love this column though and this is one of the best yet.

If you simply view everyone else in the profession as your enemy you won't be disappointed when they stab you in the back. That's what I do. I find the whole thing humorous. Ever played mortal combat? Keep that mentality and then look for friends and date outside the profession to keep.

Before there was any thought of the economy tanking, back in the late '80s -early '90s, the bitterness didn't come until after folks started working at those soul-crushing law firms. I managed to avoid that by working in public service. 20 years later, I still feel that my work has meaning.

Marin: As a creative type who now drafts passive voice provisions in debt documents, I have to say "kudos to you for such an accurate account." Well done, ma'am.

Puhleeze can someone explain to me what "T14" refers to? I've read two different explanations: 1) Top 1-4 (i.e., Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Columbia) and 2) Top 14. The latter appears to be how it's used in this article. But if this is correct, why on earth draw a line at 14 rather than, say, 15 or 20? I'm confused.

14: "Duke students are extremely bitter that they didn't go to UNC - still would've had zero job prospects, but at least could've rooted for a successful basketball program."

That may be the most ridiculous comment in the history of ATL. Indeed, if you look closely at the chart, you will see that Duke students are the least bitter in the T40.

So what, I've got my rock moves.

You know the basic premise of this article is full of shit. Can the author cite any specific evidence pertaining to the level of bitterness? I think attending a top 30 law school is a privilege, and should not be taken for granted. I have a lot of friends at UCLA Law School, and they are happy with their decision to attend this law school.

I think the drop in bitterness after Rank 40 is not as precipitous as the chart reflects. I think the bitterness would start to decrease from "Horrible Person" after around Rank 30 and drop down exponentially to "Bitter" at Rank 50. However, while I think bitterneess would remain relatively stable through about Rank 75 in Tier 2, I think it will slowly start to pick up again. I know a lot of really, really bitter people in Tier 3 schools, and I've heard stories that would lead me to believe many other people at Tier 3 schools meet the "Horrible Person" level of bitterness. I'd say there's definitely an increase in bitterness after Rank 75.

14 had so much potential, but it just didn't get the job done.

Re: Denny Chin (since comments were disabled)--

"Could the nomination of Judge Denny Chin (S.D.N.Y.) to the Second Circuit be derailed by his ruling in Chiscolm v. Bank of America?"

Lat,
Where does anyone question whether the nomination could be in question? Your WSJ LB links are completely useless and don't even discuss the BofA case. Where, aside from ATL's sister site Dealbreaker (which takes a cheap shot at Chin), is it suggested that the nomination is in trouble?

Normally, I give bloggers the benefit of the doubt, since we both know you're not a journalist. But this is just spreading a baseless rumor. While I know that spreading baseless rumors is your bread and butter, if you're going to be an asshole and post bullshit, at least allow the comments. And stop hiding behind the "Above the Law" author tag.

'Duke students are extremely bitter that they didn't go to UNC'

This is absolutely false. It is the other way round. UNC students are bitter they didn't get into Duke.

'Duke students are extremely bitter that they didn't go to UNC'

This is absolutely false. It is the other way round. UNC students are bitter they didn't get into Duke.

Imagine if a comment was made about other ethnic/racial groups. Elie couldn't have attended law school either with his profile...oh wait.....AA

You squeeze through hoops to get into law school. Law school is a(n expensive) sham that is the psychological equivalent of being in general population at Rikers. You are shivved repeatedly in the morals. You squeeze through more, tighter, spikier, on-fire hoops to become a biglaw associate. You spend 100 hours a week checking documents for typos while being treated like a servant. For 3 months. Then you get "separated" from your abusive employer and develop a relationship with your student loan officer and Haagen Dazs. That is why you are bitter.

What is so incredibly difficult about the law school experience? You read cases and commentary, attend and participate in class, write some papers...wow! the horror! What the hell do you have to be bitter about...well, I guess when you start looking for a job you can be bitter.

"I have a lot of friends at UCLA Law School and they are happy with their decision to attend this law school."

So clearly you attend UCLA - by saying this law school. If you are so happy to have attended UCLA why not say I attend UCLA. Afraid of being mocked by the NYC snobs as TTT? Don't be. NYC is full of emasculated people.

Really? Suggesting that law school is worse than the Holocaust?

Really???

Kudos to 14. As a Chicago grad, I'd say killself bitter is just about right, and yes, it is partly because our joke of a dean this last decade has run what used to be a great school into the fucking ground. So glad I went to the school that was supposed to be more rigorous and get me a prestigious clerkship -- because everyone knows Chicago turns out the best researchers/writers -- instead of Stanford, where I could've gone.

Not.

There were hot MIT coeds?

Law school isn't what is hard. Life is what is hard. People nowadays expect they will live some television fairytale. What would people rather be doing with their lives that would be so much better than law school? Teaching english at some crappy middle school? The alternatives are no better. Get over it.

14 is spot on, except for Duke, where 24 nails it.

What's weird about the law is that I am not a bitter person but I am surrounded by them. I feel like they want me to be bitter.

I want to mention the disproportionately bitter groups in every school who are only at those schools because they didn't know anything about T14 or CCN or that it made any difference. These are the people went to the school that was the best "fit", who didn't retake the LSAT, and actually listened to their undergrad pre-law advisors. They ended up at lower-ranked schools than they really could have gotten into, thinking they would be happy there. Then they learned that law school sucks, period. These people get more bitter as you look higher in the law school ranks, since prestige matters more to their classmates at higher ranks, and they're even closer to being actually presTTTigious. Bitterness among this group maxes out somewhere in the lower T14 and T10. Beware the MVPB who wishes s/he went to CCN or applied to HYS. Those people are BITTER and will disparage any higher-ranked school as "overly competitive and unlikeable" at every chance.
~from some personal experience

19=Marin

the first part of that post was pretty funny.

and, med students do get plenty bitter, mainly at what they feel are low salaries for their education/intelligence level compared to banker/biglaw types.
and as result of a lot of them "selling out" from, e.g., pediatricians --> radiologists...

Drink, yes. Little, no.

And I think PE came when he was waterboarded.

nice AFGM reference.

8, please remove the stick from your ass.

You're all idiots in my book. Are there bitter people in law school? Of course there are, just like any institution.

But the notion that all law students are bitter is riduculous. I went to a top 25 state school, and found that the vast majority of people were not bitter at all.

And I certaintly do not think that bitterness has anything to do with the "rank" of your school. The bitter law students are those who went to law school purely for the money, didn't do their homework about the credentials that were necessary to get a high-paying job from the school they attended, and are now seeking to blame everyone else for their poor decisions because they are not going to make $160K right off the bat.

However, law students who actually wanted to be a lawyer and enjoyed studying the law were not bitter, based on my experience. Also, I knew a number of students who had no intention of wanting to practice law, but rather, wanted to use their law degree to go into other professions (politics, journalism, human resoures, etc), and went to a state school because of the lower tuition.

Finally, I don't think this website is an accurate representation of law students or the legal profession in general. This website is dedicated to those obsessed with prestige and big law. The vast majority of lawyers I know are not.

To be more accurate, you would need to have a two dimensional graph, with school rank and class rank as the independent axis. Someone from a lower ranked school with a high class rank will be as bitter as the highly ranked school with the lower class rank.

I have a theory about the degree of asshatery (asshattery?) at law schools. Ever notice how students at the highest ranked school in a city tend to be more insufferable then the students at lower ranked schools in the same city - i.e., Chicago/Northwestern and GULC/GW? Just saying.

Can we please have a do-over on the editor voting?

(1) I went to Vandy for free.
(2) I graduated with honors, and got the job I wanted.
(3) I work lots of of hours, but I am certainly not bitter--- In fact, I couldn't be happier with the way things turned out.

I know some people in law who are miserable, and I know lots of people who love it. Its a mixed bag. You pick which one you want to be.

While it is true that law school will turn you into an asshole even if you weren't securely on that path already, if yuouwant to go to school (and later proactice) with true money grubbing, status obsessed assholes--go to med school

"Students at T40 and lower, already at peace with the fact that they’ll never get a firm job and will ultimately have to file for bankruptcy, exhibit the lowest levels of bitterness. "

I don't know, I don't think its until the second or third temp doc review project before T40 and lower come to this realization.

I'd say the graph needs a z-axis that displays debt level to be truely precise. Those going to a bottom tier school with little debt seem to escape the bitterness bug b/c they never say/think "but the student loans have trapped me into this" (arguments of the T14s) or "I'd be better off not have gone to law school b/c of the small salary increase compared to debt load" (argument of the rest).

I think the bitterness graph would be better presented by city than school rank. Advice to poster: stay the (#%*@ away from NYC.

I am top 5% at a T-25. I have no debt, a trust fund, and no job.

Yet I am still bitter.

NYC is a cesspool. You can live in the South and enjoy practicing law. Since there aren't as many lawyers running around, in the South, you can get a lot more tail merely by being a lawyer. and if you are like me and are a jewish lawyer - to a southern jewish girl they swoon. Loving life ! Achmajineded just shart his pants when he read this post.

All in all, a refreshing and interesting post. But neither the editors nor the commentators get to the bottom of the issue: Why are lawyers such massive douches? It's a chicken or the egg question. Is there something about individuals who choose law school and the legal profession that makes for an awful, a-hole filled industry down the road? Or does the poison flow downstream from partners, judges, and professors? Ultimately, this may be an unanswerable question. The profession has been rife with bitter, angry, antisocial, cutthroat jerkoffs for so long, no one knows when and how it got that way. But the reality is undeniable. Law students - all of them, from Yale to Callamazoo - grow more bitter, isolated, distrusting and fiendish as they progress year to year in school. And this transformation only accelerates as they become practicing lawyers. It's not always the case, but a very reliable rule of thumb.

14 - LOL @ "hot MIT coeds" and the idea they would be impressed by someone dropping the H-bomb on them.

Think of life and the law as a pyramid to the top. First cutoff: undergrad GPA. second: the LSAT third: law school grades. fourth: summer positions fifth: full positions sixth: bar exam seventh: staying past three years as associate eighth: making partner

As you progress there are simply fewer and fewer people left standing. This is consistent with mating patterns in most animals where the top 10% do 75% of the breeding. That's why the rich get richer. It isn't economic policy, it is biology.

I think a major problem is that the law rewards personal qualities that, at a larger human level, are appalling. Vicious paranoia, petty-mindedness, an obssession with minute pedantic details, a will to grind, ability to invest incredible amounts of thought and focus into mind-shatteringly dull issues, a profound facility with treachery. In general, a complete lack of perspective on life, and the morals of a lizard.

Did anybody encounter partners at Big Law that they wanted to be? There were *some* partners who were good people I wouldn't mind being (albeit a very small minority), but there was nobody I ever looked at and thought "I want to be that guy." And yet you are supposed to grind your life away, if you are lucky enough, to become somebody who you despise or, at best, tolerate.

It's really not a healthy psychological dynamic.

The prevalence of people who actually think like 60 both in certain law schools and later on in the profession is what drives people bitter.

You know, the kind of guy who would actually think to analogize getting an A in contracts (because he cried himself to sleep masturbating to UCC Article 2) to having especially colorful peacock feathers.

Or something like that.

And no, I didn't go to a "TTT" law school or fail to get good grades while in law school. Actually went to Harvard. I just think the status-obsessed mentality that pervades the overall legal culture is pretty self-justifying and ultimately moronic.

Yes 62 - but you are a woman? Aren't you?

There is a T14 law school in the midwest?

I am a 2L at Penn and my classmates are generally not THAT bitter. But the worst of it came out at OCI, and I have a feeling that it's only going to get worse. Many of us, myself probably included, are not going to have firm jobs next summer--or at graduation. This is just now starting to settle in. To be honest, though, I think the bitterness is the worst among those of us with families and previous careers.

No, 63. I'm a guy.

- 62

Well said, 61

61 NAILED it. At some point in this game, you realize that you are no different than anyone else and if you stay on this course, you will become that shallow ugly person that is a partner at a corporate law firm. The best piece of advice I ever got: find a lawyer who is a person who you admire with a life you would like to have. Both personally and professionally. Find those types of people and do what they do. For me, it was leaving biglaw and working with prosecutors.

62/66 could've fooled me...

Lone Ranger lost me at "matriculated."

Give it time, and you also will become an asshole just like your former buddies. Lawyers and assholes, a distinction without a difference.

Wash U was awesome personality-wise. At least while I was there. Very few bitter assholes. And the ones we had were quickly ignored. Very pleasant law school experience actually.

Wash U was awesome personality-wise. At least while I was there. Very few bitter assholes. And the ones we had were quickly ignored. Very pleasant law school experience actually.

Agreed. WashU was great. Nice midwestern folks.

Agreed. WashU was great. Nice midwestern folks.

If 60 isn't a troll, he will never understand.

60 here. That was a Partner Emeritus type shtick. You bought it. Only liberals think that people are animals.

I think that much of the culture of law stems from the divisive, adversarial thinking that's necessary in the practice of law. You're bound to keep your client's secrets, to argue for their best interests without any consideration for the public good other than the bounds of law. This is as it should be, but there's a constant struggle to keep this view from infecting the rest of your life. Suddenly there's always an untouchable Other--no-offered 3Ls, BigLaw partners, people who took on massive student loans, TTT grads, contract doc reviewers, federal judges--who deserve whatever pain they have coming to them because of their entitlement, hubris, greed, poor judgment, laziness, lack of social skills, or general human frailty. And you don't have to have pity or empathy for them, or even basic understanding.

I don't think "bitterness" is the right term by itself; there's also envy, condescension, fear, smugness, righteous indignation, and rage. In law school they call it "thinking like a lawyer", and it comes with experience.

77- Fail. Too believable.

60/77 - Fail. Too believable.

60/77 here - Nope it is true. Wanted to see the reaction of trying to encapsultating the very worst in a single post.

Le travail c'est la santé
Rien faire c'est la conserver
Les prisonniers du boulot
N'font pas de vieux os.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7IwInwZxp0

60 - seems paradoxical, but sounds like I should have more opportunities to practice mating. Knowing me, I must've squandered them.

83. That's the interesting thing about western culture. everyone gets one mate so the lowest usually get to procreate as well as the best. This increases the wealth disparity. If the best were having many wives they would have great offspring. But in this culture the best mate with the best and the worst mate with the worst. but everyone gets to have kids.

One of my theories is that one has only a very small window to achieve an "elite" legal career, i.e. biglaw position, federal clerkship, respected teaching position, interesting public policy postion. You need a very high GPA and LSAT score to get into an elite school, and then you need well above average grades your first year, to be considered for many of the above jobs. Basically, that first year of law school will set the course of your entire career, and, if you miss it, you're sort of screwed, either in the money you're going to make over your lifetime, or the type of work you want to be doing. Bitterness comes in as you slowly start to realize how screwed you are.

It is possible to overcome this setback, but it's difficult and takes a lot of work. I'm not sure that most people are willing to commit to that kind of dedication.

I could be wrong, of course. My own bitterness tends to cloud my judgment, even years out of law school.

I don't need your stinkin law school.

--six figure paralegal secure

I don't need your stinkin law school.

--six figure paralegal secure

85, sadly I think you are right.

84, wealthiest and "best" are far from the same thing. Also, the wealthy are far less likely to have bunches of kids because that means splitting up the wealth more, and most wealthy people don't have any interest in diluting the concentration of wealth.

This has been a fairly interesting discussion. I think 61 offers the best analysis so far.

A related post that I would be interested to see: a poll, wherein readers select the practice group in their firm that is the most bitter/overworked/miserable, and the practice group that is the most balanced/normal/happy.

58 – It’s definitely that the douches choose law school. I remember in my first class, first day, I got called on first. I reflexively said “um” before I started to answer and fifty hands around the room shot up. Those people were most definitely douches before they got to law school.

"Did anybody encounter partners at Big Law that they wanted to be?"

I was going to say Atticus Finch, but then I realized that he's fictional, and was a sole practitioner.

The real smart people are in the sciences - and not necessarily even doctors. The folks that do high level math and neuroscience. On some level, lawyers know that they aren't that bright. Otherwise they would be a touch more secure.

Obama was lucky. He got to go to HLS but never actually had to practice law. He wouldn't last five minutes on Wall Street with that ego of his. He would get his ass kicked.

"He wouldn't last five minutes on Wall Street with that ego of his."

But "Wall Street" is all about ego and the perception of ego. I think he would do just fine.

No. Because on Wall Street he would have to actually know things and do real work. Couldn't just make speeches all day.

94=95

"No. Because on Wall Street he would have to actually know things and do real work. Couldn't just make speeches all day. "

Wow, it's great that you know about everything the president has done in his life. It's not like he had to, you know, work hard to achieve anything. I'm also impressed by your deep and extensive knowledge of the world of "Wall Street."

Obama is an affirmative action jobber and everyone knows it. No occidental transcript, no columbia transcript, no lsat score. He was a privilege white kid who messed up high school and then fell back on AA to get himself privilege by pretending to be an oppressed black man. Its really an insult to ordinary americans who work themselves to death for that type of opporunity

I'm a 2L at Berkeley, and had a hell of a time at OCI getting to the realization that maybe a law degree from a great school isn't going to be enough to get me a secure job, etc etc, and yet after about a week of sulking about it, I got over it and decided to move on. My experience with my classmates at Berkeley has been that they are all nice people with interesting backgrounds, brilliant minds, and good futures ahead of them. I am not now, nor do I ever plan to be, bitter, because it's silly to spend your life being pissed that other people seem to have it easier than you. Lawyers complain that they work too many hours, get treated badly, and don't make enough money unless they're a BigLaw partner. Well, there are plenty of people who work long hours and make a lot less money than lawyers, and often do backbreaking physical labor at that. I find that keeping some sense of perspective helps keep away cynicism/bitterness/whatever you want to call it. And maybe I walk around wearing permanently rose-colored glasses, but I haven't encountered too many of these bitter people you all seem to see everywhere in the legal world...

Obama graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard. That trumps my performance at UVA any day.

Here is how it worked. He did terrible in high school. went to shitty occidental. AAed himself to columbia. did poorly at columbia. AAed himself to Harvard with bad LSATs. Then AAed himself onto the law review. The law review gave him magna standing not his grades. You will find no transcripts or scores for this fraud.

"Obama is an affirmative action jobber and everyone knows it. "

Exactly. I hear that when he ran for president, Obama slept in till noon, ambled out to give a speech at 2 or 3, and then partied 'till 2 in the morning. Because that's all it takes to be president. It's not like it takes some amount of intelligence and hard work to become the most powerful person in the country.

Look, you can hate Obama and his ideas and still admit that he's a reasonably intelligent man. You'll be taken a lot more seriously.

Choosing to go to a T30 state law school on scholarship was the best decision I ever made. Not only am I in a career I actually kind of enjoy (although honestly I would probably prefer teaching law to practicing it), I make pretty good money without all the debt worries that so many people constantly whine about.

- Definitely not bitter, although possibly a bit of a self admitted douche.

Yes 103 he is a reasonably intelligent man. I didn't realize that "reasonalbe intelligence" was the standard for admittance to Harvard Law School.

No, 105, all it takes to get into HLS is "AA," right?

I'm getting the impression that the things you "don't realize" are pretty extensive...

Give me an LSAT score 106

85 makes an interesting point, but I tend to disagree.

I do think that first year law school is most important for the job you'll get right out of law school (big law, fed clerkship, etc), but its not the end-all-be-all of your career. I currently practice in a major market, and know a lot of attorneys who started off working as assistant district attorneys and have moved on to well-respected firms (V-100) and other interesting positions.

But I do agree with 85 that it does take a lot of work to overcome the "setback," i.e., a few years making not a lot of money while working long hours. And I think this is where a lot of the bitterness comes from. A lot of younger attorneys see their peers making a lot more than they are, so a lot of them get bitter and give up.

That's just my opinion, based on my experience.

"Give me an LSAT score 106"

Who's LSAT score? WHY?! None of this makes any difference. An LSAT scores how you performed on one test on one day. So what?

I want Barack Obama's LSAT. It might matter because someone was denied a spot at Harvard to make space for a charlatan. I want Obama's LSAT score. I will admit for your sake that it does not matter. Just give me the number. do it.

105 - I'm sorry that you wake up every morning shocked and incredulous that, despite you average intelligence and mediocre work ethic, you only got into Stetson and Southern Missouri Law School, while some idiot like Obama, who had everything handed to him (inherited wealth, an easy-to-pronounce name, parental connections at all the right Ivy League schools, top-of-the-line tutors, marriage to a fantastically rich heiress and an open commission into the armed services branch of his choice) could POSSIBLY have gotten further than you in the game of Life. When, in an hour or so, you shuffle out early from your job to hit up the 4:30pm happy hour at Joe's Bar and Grill, complaining about how all of "them" are taking Monday off and whining about how AA screwed you out of a job, promotion, car-buying-program, etc., please have a Coors Light for me. Taste the Rockies!!

Douche.

108,

I do tend to agre with you. I also tend to think that the first job out of law school (based on those first year grades) really does determine the arc of one's career. Working at a big firm, clerking for a federal judge, just adds a certain "cachet" to your resume that will otherwise take years and years to achieve. Connections will be made, doors will be opened, that will otherwise remain closed. The circle at the top really is quite small and insular.

Let's say you really want to work at the solicitor general's office at DOJ. You might be smart enough, but unless you've had the "right" previous positions or experience, you'll simply never be hired.

I suppose the point is to accept where you are, or otherwise to set a realistic goal for where you want to be and work toward that goal...or find personal satisfaction some other way. LIke you said, that working hard part is where most people get hung up and become bitter.

-85.

111, what well-known east coast school did Barack Obama Junior's father get his graduate degree in economics at?

"Just give me the number. do it. "

Jebus Christ, I'm not gonna give you a number. I don't know. And...I don't have to know, because I can look at the man and judge him by everything else he's done in his life.

And to preempt your silly objection, no, I don't know Obama's LSAT score because he hasn't told me. He doesn't have to tell me. Know what? That's doesn't bother me, because I know that the LSAT is indicative of nothing.

Also, 111 for the win.

Actually 111 I am Jewish, T14 educated and will be taking off Monday from my V50 for the Day of Atonement. yes, I am bitter that I didn't get into Harvard. But no I had connections. I am bitter that someone I outscored went to Harvard and I did not. Your portrayal of me as a flyover red stater is hilarious though. You actually have some talent. Now give me the fucking LSAT score.

"I am bitter that someone I outscored went to Harvard and I did not."

You have absolutely no proof of this. And I somehow doubt that you're angry at all the other people you've supposedly outscored who got into HLS (I'm sure there are a few). Seriously, get over yourself.

Okay okay, if there is LSAT score for Obama, then how about a GPA. That doesn't matter either?

The last turn of the comments toward comparing cock sizes, ahem, LSAT scores, shows why lawyers are bitter. The majority are approval seeking sycophants who couldn't live with themselves if they didn't do something prestigious and seemingly unobtainable by the masses. Coupled with the demands of law school (which does suck camel balls) and the willingness of these people to throw their peers under a bus, the law school environment earns its reputation as an asshole factory. The rest of us, who realize that we're pretty much literate plumbers who overpaid to learn our trade, just cope with the fact that we didn't inherit a fortune and deal with our life sentence of upper middle class lifestyles.

118, you are right. Lawyers aren't the elite. The elite are the clients. The lawyers are the whores.

Oh yeah that's right. As soon as we talk about Obama and LSAT scores suddenly the LSAT is useless. If obama had rocked the LSAT we would hear about it nonstop. Like it or not the law is a cock measuring profession. How big is Obama's LSAT? PRobably pretty small. He is effeminate.

Explain to me what the basis for letting Obama into Harvard should of been if not the LSAT? just wondering

"Okay okay, if there is LSAT score for Obama, then how about a GPA. That doesn't matter either? "

Yawn. Who cares? It's not as if he hasn't done anything noteworthy since then.

Look, at this point I have nothing but pity for you. Nurse that bitterness; it might be all that you end up with. Bye.

105/115 - If you plan to rage on for the remainder of your unhappy days about how you are smarter, better looking, more deserving and, unequivocally, a better human being than a particular person, please visit TShirtsForAssHats.com where you can custom order a shirt that has "Gunner" on the front and "Douche" on the back. Enter promo code: T-14 for a discount. Please note that I am not T-14 personally. I actually went to state undergrad and got my JD from a mail-in community college program, but I'm black and now I work for a V10 firm which hasn't cut my salary, gave me a bonus even though I didn't hit my hours and pays me an extra "Hispanic-happiness" amount every two weeks. Also, my multiple bonuses are paid for with your tax dollars. I don't mean "your tax dollars" as in the American people; rather, every dollar that YOU, in particular, pay in federal (and some state) taxes is transferred directly to ME via the AA money-away-from-white-people program. But take heart!! If you ever run for President, I promise to vote for you.

113 - You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Nope, none at all. Well done!

Who cares how someone got into Harvard Law School? okay i guess it doesnt matter, perhaps a lottery system would work.

105/115- Im not white Im Jewish. My people were oppressed. That didn't get me into Harvard Law School. A douche is a guy who does poorly in a privileged white setting and then uses AA to get into Harvard despite terrible grades and LSAT. Clarence Thomas used AA too but he actually got great grades at Holy Cross. Obama is a fraud Clarence Thomas is not.

105/115 - First, you need to put 105/115 at the BOTTOM of you posts, as if it is a signature.

Second, your Jewish-vs-white distinction marks you as a douche even more clearly than your future t-shirt will.

Third, your religio-ethnicity is irrelevent as you have outed yourself as a Republican hack. Justice Thomas is a fraud. He has consistently, throughout his judicial tenure, opposed affirmative action in every form. Yet, he is on the bench because, and solely because, his is black. He knew he was offered the position solely on his skin color, and accepted it nonetheless. I double dog dare you to refute any of those three sentences or to present an argument that this is not equivalent to fraud. Enjoy the holiday! Douche.

111

First, scientists have proven the racial distinction of the jewish people through DNA. Who are you to tell me what race I am in? That's offensive and I am hurt.

Second, I am a right wing Jew.

Third, I believe that jusice thomas supports using race as a factor - as do most conservatives including myself - but not as dispositive of admittance. In other words someone getting into harvard with a 164 is low but might not be too low to violate equal protection. on the other hand someone getting in with a 155 is clearly undeserving of acceptance. If obama got like a 165 or so I wouldn't have a problem and I would stop berating you. I fear though that he tallied a paltry 158 or so.

I wasn't aware that T14 law schools admit solely on the basis of LSAT scores. Or GPAs. Or whatever metric it is that in your mind makes you deserving of a spot and Obama not.

If you think Obama's a hack, then who wrote his books? The guy was obviously talented enough to write a bestselling autobiography -- how many other HLS grads have done that by now? Doesn't that suggest that he was in fact worthy of being admitted to HLS, and that his application demonstrated that merit to the admissions board in some way or another that yours did not?

- not an HLS grad

Marin is consistently funny. She beats the heck out of Elie and Lat. The line about drafting the McDonald's note offering in the passive voice had just enough detail to be hilarious, without seeming like it was trying to hard (like Elie always does).

128 you are right. If you are a far left radical black nationalist that by itself warrants admission. But is that the only thing? Should we then completely scrap the LSAT for everyone except the far left radical black nationalist? Perhaps the far right rural american nationalist should be allowed into yale for a unique perspective into the view from appalachia? Wouldn't that make a unique contribution to the discourse? I am sure he would enrich the class with his views on the United Nations.

LSATs are tomorrow. Is law school a good idea?*

*I have spent the past couple of years in Biglaw working as a paralegal, and surprisingly still want to go. I find myself hating everyone, and arguing about the most trivial things as a result. Some people call me an asshole (but in that Larry David sort of way). Psychologically, I think I may be light years ahead of the kids who are going straight to LS from College. Any thoughts oh wise ATL commenters?

Whatever, 130. If you're just going to make logically incoherent arguments about "far left radical black nationalism," whatever that is, then good luck to you. I can't really take you seriously if you conclude, from Obama's being admitted, that the LSAT wsa "scrapped" in his case or that right-wingers from Appalachia were discriminated against as a result.

In fact, apart from being quite silly your whole line of reasoning is also circular. You argue Obama was admitted through AA because he's a talentless, left wing hack. But you also argue his AA admittance shows that he's a talentless, left wing hack. All the while you dismiss every indicator that he's actually a brilliant guy. He got himself elected President of the U.S.A., you know?

@128

Law school is a great idea if you want to waste 3 years of your life and tens of thousands of dollars.

Don't listen to all those lawyers at your firm telling you "don't go to law school. They are just messing with you.

I suck. My bitter comment was directed @ 131.

-133

131,

You'd better do well on that test. I don't know if I could in good conscience recommend law school to anyone these days who did not have the option of attending Yale, Harvard, or Stanford. Maybe Columbia, NYU, Boalt, or Chicago also, just maybe, but certainly no lower.

Considerations change if you have some way of avoiding paying sticker price.

So 132 your argument is the George W. Bush is a brilliant man because he good himself elected President?

Bush 41: privileged because of white aristocracy
Bush 43: privileged because of white aristocracy
Obama 44: privileged because of guilt over aforementioned aristocracy

135 - As much as I would love to attend any one of those schools, there is just no way that I will be able to do so (given my practice scores). That being said, my goal is to do well enough to go to some T100 with a lot of money on the table. After one year, I may try to transfer, which at least gives me a $50k discount, or I may just ride the free tuition gravy train to mid-law heaven.

A knack for spouting off nonsense while standing on bales of hay in Iowa and New Hampshire does not necessarily make one any kind of intellectual bright light. So Obama getting elected president does not make him brilliant. Reagan had no pedigree or a powerhouse brain and he still became president.

137, my advice is don't ask attorneys for advice because they are protectionist and have no character. You know the issues at hand. Just work your ass off and don't worry about other people. fuck em.

most of the advice on this site is for the guy or gal trying to get to nyc - which is a shithole in my opinion - there are much better places to practicecoming from the midwest. I work v50 in nyc but wish i had gone to california or the south. the northeast is a decaying old man -

v50 in nyc is better than unemployed in california right?

touche 141 touche

85/112

Point well taken. I agree that there are certain legal positions that are virtually impossible to attain unless you have the right resume (i.e., outstanding academics, big firm experience, which are, in large part, decided after the first year of law school). I certainly agree that working for the solicitor general would qualify as one of those positions.

However, I don't think this phenomenon is limited to the legal profession. For example, if you want to be an investment banker at Goldman, I would imagine that your ability to attain that position would be largely determined within the first few years of your career (academic record, early work experience). But that does not mean that you cannot have a successful, lucrative, fulfilling career as an investment banker with a smaller shop if you work hard at it.

In other words, I think there are certain jobs in every profession that are next-to-impossible to attain for all but the select few. But that does not mean that your career is defined by the first job that you have. And unfortunately, I think too many law students and recent graduates adopt the opposite line of reasoning (big law right out of school or career bust) and tend to lose perspective, which in turn hinders their career even more.

Again, just my opinion. Thanks for your thoughts.

61 - that is a great comment, well done. You write a lot better than most of the lifeless morons who post on this site

"All the while you dismiss every indicator that he's actually a brilliant guy."

While cracks along the lines of "57 states" are more than enough for the left to dismiss a conservative politician's intelligence, I won't limit my argument to that. If it helps, I've known way too many top law students to pronounce a man brilliant just by that credential alone. I'll admit I didn't attend HYS, just CCN, but I met enough students at my law school, and enough HYS students, to roll my eyes whenever anybody fawns over this stuff. Can they be brilliant? Sure -- after a couple decades in practice or studying some other subject, they can be a formidable force, but, come on, take away your defensiveness over Obama, take away a top law school student wanting to impress people, take away someone who's seen too many movies and just sit back and think about your classmates--the people you used to drink beer with, the people you used to argue with, the people you used to gossip with--pretty bright? Yeah. Brilliant? No.

I'm sure he's pretty clever. Given the way the LSAT is structured that's often a requirement to get into law school. Actually knowing jack s--t about economics, government, political history, world affairs, etc. is definitely not a requirement of getting into a top law school, however, and I'm not at all confident it's the case with Obama. True, he does have a couple books to his name, but ghost writers are so common, it should go without saying that you have to be wary of bringing that up as a counterargument. The new book that came out on Obama's marriage, a book by a guy that's largely supportive to him, seems to support the idea he had help with writing it.

As far as affirmative action, Obama own book states he received a boost from it, so you can't really fault conservatives for mentioning this when you reference academic credentials as a sign of his intelligence.

- not 130

130 here. Obama was supposed to write a book about race relations in America and ended up writing a book about himself. That is classic narcissism. Believe you me he's got some serious insecurity issues. That probably comes from being ditched by his dad and having to lean on AA his whole life.

While I admit that there are non-racist arguments against AA, the idea that a Black person should have to prove that he deserves his position, including the Presidency, to any white person who questions his qualifications is condescending and ridiculous. If you don't know President Obama's LSAT score then don't make any claims about it one way or another.

"If you don't know President Obama's LSAT score then don't make any claims about it one way or another."

If he says he got a boost from affirmative action, and he did, than either his GPA or his LSAT was below the norm for what would regularly get you admitted.

You can't ardently defend a program that gives people a boost solely by what color they are and then expect your political opponents to forget about that program at points when it's convenient for you but not for them.

Here let me help out. Try this:

-

"The idea that a Black person should have to prove that he deserves his position, including the Supreme Court, to any white person who questions his qualifications is condescending and ridiculous. If you don't know Clarence Thomas's LSAT score then don't make any claims about it one way or another."

-

Now, the fact that liberals don't know Clarence Thomas's LSAT score hasn't prevented them from calling him an affirmative action admit since the day he was nominated (even though he, unlike Obama, never said anything to indicate that he was). Your side has spent the past 17 years doing this and now you're angry that were applying your standards to one of your guys.

If the people admitted through affirmative action achieved the same qualifications as others, or near the same qualifications, the program would quickly become unnecessary -- your side wouldn't raise holy hell whenever it was opposed.

The truth of the matter, though, is somewhat different here:

http://www.debatingracialpreference.org/GRUTTER-Rates.htm#tablenote

130 here again. I am not opposed to AA! I know that Clarence Thomas was near the top of his class at Holy Cross. And yes I would like to know his LSAT. If Obama was within range for HLS - then yes give him the AA edge. But if you are going to say he is brilliant based on attending HLS then we should know how close he came to gain that position - and to go the next step further and infer that he is brilliant by attending. My position is that AA is being stretched to give people an advantage beyond a reasonable norm. Should any standards be applied? Should HLS admit someone with a 2.0 and 145 LSAT? Why not? SInce GPA and LSAT do not matter.

Oh my God. That chart is unbelievable.

The AA in the case of Obama is not racial - it is political. HLS overlooked bad grades and bad LSATs to let Obama in specifically because of his far left stance. A black nationalist radical iantisemite in NYC got him in. If Thomas had Obama's terrible numbers he would not have gotten in. Remember we know Thomas had top undergrad grades not Obama. Race was a vehicle to get Obama the prestige he needed. And yet he turned around called Harvard racist for never having a black Harvard law review editor. My problem is not with AA - it is with the abuse of AA to get in a far leftist. The intent of AA was assist disadvantage minority students who weren't privy to testtaking assistance. Obama -on the other hand -was a spoiled kid from Hawaii who woke up at age 27 , realized he was close to blowing the privileges previously bestowed upon him and used AA. He wasn't some bright disadvantaged minority student from the ghetto who studied all the time. he was a punk who thought it would be cool to go to Harvard Law School at an old age. That's it.

Thank you for the epic School Rank vs. Bitterness graph.

For a fact there are no hot MIT co-eds.

The graph, at least around the 15 - 17 mark, needs some work. I went to Vandy and I have to say that the students there are largely non-bitter folks. I would even go so far as to say that many are happy-go-lucky. We have a good time, are generally supportive of eachother, and don't obsess too much over rank. Even the majority of the people I know who got deferred from great firms took their deferral in stride. Some are working for a handful of very well known judges. Others are taking the opportunity to travel or learn a language, with a minimum of bitterness.

Those of my classmates who were bitter (about law school generally and about deferrals) mostly came from the more prestigous undergraduate institutions. There is a particular Yale grad that comes to mind.

One commenter wrote that Obama was magna cum laude at Harvard Law School. Whatever his LSAT score as, it takes intelligence to garner some of the best grades at Top 10 law schools.

When you get onto the Harvard Law Review (something that is also determined by affirmativeaction), you get access to their outlines -- a perk that HLR members are supposed to keep strictly among themselves.

I don't know whether you get a magna designation automatically, as another poster mentioned, just by being on HLR (that sounds suspicious even with Harvard's inflated honors), but once you get on Harvard Law Review, it becomes a lot easier to get good grades.

Liberals, democrats, school administrators, etc. ardently support a program and, then, getting their way, seem to be shocked at other people even mentioning the program exists--like this some sort of secret we're just supposed to keep amongst ourselves. Quit discriminating according to race and we'll quit pointing out you discriminate according to race.

The bottom line is Obama profitted from AA - but his circumstance didn't warrant AA assistance. Clarence Thomas was dirt poor, Obama was a rich spoiled brat who blew off high school. He was promoted because of his black nationalist posing.

Obama's LSAT score is 176. 100% info

"My position is that AA is being stretched to give people an advantage beyond a reasonable norm."

Of course. That's why all the top schools have more than 50% minority populations, why nearly every elite corporation in America has a black CEO, and why women make up 80% of all law firm partners. It's this rampant give away of privilege. You called it.

Douche.

Even the controversial U of M program affected 17 individuals. It's not like anyone can just spout off on the internet about race without any basis whatsoever... Wait.

"My position is that AA is being stretched to give people an advantage beyond a reasonable norm."

Of course. That's why all the top schools have more than 50% minority populations, why nearly every elite corporation in America has a black CEO, and why women make up 80% of all law firm partners. It's this rampant give away of privilege. You called it.

Douche.

Even the controversial U of M program affected 17 individuals. It's not like anyone can just spout off on the internet about race without any basis whatsoever... Wait.

"My position is that AA is being stretched to give people an advantage beyond a reasonable norm."

Of course. That's why all the top schools have more than 50% minority populations, why nearly every elite corporation in America has a black CEO, and why women make up 80% of all law firm partners. It's this rampant give away of privilege. You called it.

Douche.

Even the controversial U of M program affected something like 17 individuals. Colleges CAN consider things other than test scores when creating a class. It's a fact. Deal.

"My position is that AA is being stretched to give people an advantage beyond a reasonable norm."

Of course. That's why all the top schools have more than 50% minority populations, why nearly every elite corporation in America has a black CEO, and why women make up 80% of all law firm partners. It's this rampant give away of privilege. You called it.

Douche.

Even the controversial U of M program affected something like 17 individuals. Colleges CAN consider things other than test scores when creating a class. It's a fact. Deal.

If Obamas LSAT was 176 he would not have needed AA. That's bs.

My position is that AA is being used primarily not to give the bubble student an edge but to render the unqualified student a shoe-in. According to that chart somebody with a 3.3. and a 157 LSAT would get into Michigan Law School - an elite school. That's fucking crazy.

Dude was magna at Harvard Law, a Top 10 school. Get off his case.

Yes but it was all bullshit

firms are snotty towards white transfers but not towards AA jobbers like obama. that's discrimination. Obama did not deserve admittance to Harvard Law School. He is a lie. I fret that it makes him insecure. You know, that he couldn't do at 27 what white kids could do at 22. It makes him hate white kids. Hence, his black nationalism. Carry on.

firms are snotty towards white transfers but not towards AA jobbers like obama. that's discrimination. Obama did not deserve admittance to Harvard Law School. He is a lie. I fret that it makes him insecure. You know, that he couldn't do at 27 what white kids could do at 22. It makes him hate white kids. Hence, his black nationalism. Carry on.

"Obama's LSAT score is 176. 100% info"

Umm....genius...the LSAT didn't use a 180 pt scale when he applied so obviously this is incorrect.

The argument seems to be it doesn't matter how he got in because he has done so much great work since then. Yeah, um....he was able to do all of that because of HLS plus more AA on top of that. So let's say he had an awful GPA and an awful LSAT should he have been let in? By this standard Bush deserved to go to Yale and Harvard Business School because he was able to turn the privilege into a presidency. That makes no sense whatsoever. This country should have no patronage and AA for those who are truly deserved and disadvantaged. Not for fuckups like Bush and Obama.

157 - I nominate your comment for "Right Wing Lunacy & Propaganda Comment of the Year."

Being on ANY law review anywhere, let alone HLS Law Review does not make getting good grades EASIER. It makes it harder. Yes, most law reviews will file and distribute outlines and all kinds of other resources. But that is cold comfort when you pile on all the additional work being on a law review staff (let alone board) to your workload.

I'm sorry you didn't get onto any journals dude, but claiming that those people who did get all the breaks is total bs. Take your pity party to people who don't know any better.

Douche.

172- Barack Obama never wrote a note for the law review and according to fellow classmates spent little time there actually working.

That is all.