Comments on: Everybody Learns A Lesson from Georgetown Professor Peter Tague

By: guest

guest — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:13:22 +0000

“Vague Tagues” was a silly nickname made up by some dimwit who thought himself a poet. I found Tague to be a great professor.
BIG DICK SECURE

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:10:35 +0000

Why do people keep talking about ethics and confidential communications. What prevents you from discussing something a law professor tells you in class?

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:23:33 +0000

16: they are also better spellers.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:30:41 +0000

when I had criminal justice w/Tague in night school, no one really beleived him when he said Renquist was retiring, it was clearly part of his show. I guess the day students are a bit naive.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:42:12 +0000

As “Vague Tague” himself would say on credibility of rumors:
“Imagine receiving a tip from an informant who was crack-addict thin, very eccentric in manner, and wearing a bowtie of questionable taste . . .”
I’ll admit I was bored out my mind in his class (2005) at times, but this was totally Tague, and totally hilarious.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:38:06 +0000

UCLA Crim Pro professor does the same thing – got me for about 5 minutes before he started explaining himself. This isn’t a new learning tool. Actually, it seems similar to the very common little lesson of having someone run into the room, and like steal a backback, then run out. Then the professor wants people to come up with a description. Any law student that goes running to the media about any of this crap is a self-absorbed jackass.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:05:18 +0000

What is that shit hanging from his face? check you mustache much?

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:56:09 +0000

“But the reports that make it sound like Tague gave us a rumor, then immediately began lecturing us on why rumors aren’t to be trusted is quite accurate.”
Huh?
-GW Secure

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:37:40 +0000

Near the end of the last quote (in the “update”), in the line that reads: “I’m not saying we should have believed him, I’m just saying we’re slightly less dumb than the story makes us sound”; shouldn’t it be ” should NOT have believed him”?

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:52:42 +0000

I read Kash’s piece with the strange headline about the professor owing an apology, and then with the rest of the piece never explaining that bizarre suggestion. The professor owes no apology at all; great lesson. The student who sent it to Radar Online may be a moron, but it is difficult to understand why that student owes anyone an apology. The blame lies solely with the media outlets who printed this story without making any effort to engage in journalism.