Affirmative Walrus's Profile
Comments
I think the global warming defense is quite valid, actually.
Our news organization have been employing the global warming defense for quite some time now. Active hurricane season? Global warming. Slow hurricane season? Climate change (same difference as global warming, use when not related to warming). Melting ice bergs? Global warming. Thickening Antarctic ice? Climate change. Migrating giant squid? Global warming. A drop in global temperatures over the last 11 years? Climate change.
You see, the global warming/climate change defense is actually quite malleable. It's the perfect defense.
On that same note, pass Cap-and-Trade now! Job-creating businesses our killing us. Literally.
GLOBAL WARMING SECURE
Things are definitely getting better.
Just check the government's totally reliable recovery.gov stimulus maps for jobs "saved or created."
Wow. Look at all those jobs that have been "saved"! I mean, Obama has even managed to "save" jobs with taxpayers' money in congressional districts that don't even exist!
SAVED JOBS SECURE
No, the government will take care of you.
Empathy, baby.
EQUALITY SECURE
@4,
I have no idea what you're talking about.
But what I do know is that $100 billion in improper government payments is only .027% of fiscal year 2009's budget of $3.7 trillion. No big deal.
But what is a big deal is Gitmo. Close it down, transfer the freedom fighters to New York, and put on the show.
EQUALITY SECURE
Excuse me, that should be 2.7%. Still no big deal.
Excellent post. I shall opine as follows:
It is well-settled law that the word "diversity" contains magical connotations - a Pavlovian response, if you will. Diversity immediately conjures images in the mind of compassion, forward-thinking, and magnanimity. This is the essence of BigLaw, and it should be reflected in our hiring and placement policies.
Now, some of you bigoted, hateful, angry white men may be asking yourselves, "Diversity to what end?" I'll tell you: physical appearance. As the Supreme Court found in Gratz and other law school-related diversity cases, differing skin colors creates a new marketplace of ideas, thus enriching your BigLaw experience.
Do you racist BigLaw associates not recognize the unique contributions of colored lawyers brought about by virtue of their color? For example, one time at my BigLaw firm, we were working on a case in the Northern District of North Pole, and a partner asked who was intimately familiar with the hunting habits of
The Most Interesting Eskimo in the World. As the only ebony Affiramtive Walrus at the firm, I was able to expound upon the reason for TMIEITW's failure to catch me. Without diversity, my BigLaw firm would have lost countless clients and the talen level would have suffered.
I know I speak for everyone when I recount this and countless other experiences each of you have encountered during your firm practice and while in law school about the power of diverse skin color.
If you disagree with any of the foregoing, you're a racist bigot hate-monger molester. Darker skin means an enhanced practice. It just does.
* rings bell *
EQUALITY SECURE
Yes, anyone named "Kwesi" AA'd into Iowa. Good for them. Bringing in a Kwesi will enrich their learning experience.
On the other hand, perhaps the urinating boyfriend was just trying to diversity his woman-beating? Maybe next time he could slap the white privilege out of her face without worrying about adverse employment consequences.
AFFIRMATIVE BEATINGS SECURE
* kill-switch engaged *
A: This law firm needs moar diversity.
Racist, bigoted, hateful, white male child molester: Why?
A: Because it's the right thing to do.
Racist, bigoted, hateful, white male child molester: Why?
A: Because we should include moar non-whites in the practice of law.
Racist, bigoted, hateful, white male child molester: Why?
A: Because blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in our law firm.
Racist, bigoted, hateful, white male child molester: So?
A: So we need to be more inclusive.
Racist, bigoted, hateful, white male child molester: Why?
A: To show that we're not racists.
* rings bell *
EQUALITY SECURE
The health-care surcharge cannot be a tax because President Obama promised during his campaign not to raise taxes on people making under $250,000. No worries.
Also, President Obama promised in his speech before Congress that his health-care bill will not add "one penny" to the deficit. Rest assured.
Relax, guys. The rich will pay for it. They owe it to us.
TAXES/DEFICIT SECURE
Although, I must admit that it has become substantially more difficult to ask Daddy Walrus "to fire somebody" since he resigned from office amid a corruption scandal for lying about not living within his legislative district.
Oh well, I suppose the Affirmative Walrus brood will have to retreat to our three fabulous homes in Palm Beach, Huntington Station, and Amityville to launch our crusade against social injustice.
Perhaps my cause would have received a warmer reception at Berkeley? Mmm...do they offer an L.L.M.? Daddy!
EQUALITY SECURE
I personally support Ms. Radnofsky's bizarre interpretation of the Texas Constitution, which in no way is politically calculated as an opportunistic means of criticizing her political opponent.
Rather, we should herald Ms. Radnofsky's efforts to attain social justice (i.e., if homosexuals can't marry, then nobody can). This approach to constitutional interpretation comports with my own personal agenda regarding legal unions: walrus marriage.
Ladies, once you go ebony, blubbery, and tusky, you never go back. Where the white women at?
BESTIALITY SECURE
29,
I concur.
Criticizing a black man for his undeniable race-baiting, commenter-threatening posts is irrefutable evidence of racism.
If you tell it how it is, I will play The Card. You don't want me to play The Card.
EQUALITY SECURE
First to say that you can't vote against health care and call yourself a black man.
I am the arbiter of race.
I am the walrus.
EQUALITY SECURE
Actually, check that.
It now appears that Jesse Jackson said it first.
If you vote against murder, then you can't call yourself a black man.
EQUALITY SECURE
The assault on racist verbs continues.
Blurb #1 contains two sentences, neither of which contains a verb.
Bravo.
RACIST VERBS SECURE
So what if I screw up the first blurb in my post - twice - and then screw up my comment explaining my screwed-up post?
Yeah, I said it - "the seal the ATL office." What do you want from me? Racist competence-seekers.
You're just a bunch of cowards hiding behind anonymous online message boards. Question my competence to my face! Although you have no idea where I live or how to meet me, I dare you to question my competence to my face, bitches.
THE SEAL THE ATL OFFICE SECURE
I love New York City. I mean, it's so, like, big and cosmopolitan and stuff.
Despite the fact that the approximately 20 million "undocumented workers" in the United States - most of whom live in the Southwest in what I like to call "fly-over territory" - emigrated from non-English-speaking South American countries, I bet none of you unsophisticated rednecks have ever stumbled into multi-lingual conversations. Yep, only in New York City. Oops. I meant: Yep, this is my city (hat tip: The Sport's Guy).
Of course, I had absolutely no idea what they were saying because I've never bothered to learn another language. I mean, look, we have to keep the victim's totem pole in perspective: I'm at the top because black Africans enslaved my black ancestors hundreds of years ago and sold them to white Europeans. That means the rest of you accommodate me.
Also, while it may have been illegal to kick someone "in the cojones," slapping the white privilege right out of that hand-or-possibly-foot model's face would have definitely been justified.
Finally, in honor of the health-care cloture vote tonight, I'd like to reiterate the words of Jesse Jackson to you Uncle Tom legislators everywhere: "You can't vote against health care and call yourself a black man." Got it, you uppity negroes?
BETTER-THAN-YOU-BECAUSE-WE-SPEAK-LANGUAGES-OTHER-THAN-ENGLISH-HERE-AND-ONLY-HERE-EVEN-THOUGH-I-HAVE-NO-IDEA-WHAT-THEY'RE-SAYING SECURE


I echo the sentiments above.
No one cares about a legal society that emphasizes and promotes archaic ideas like history, tradition, or founding principles. Get a clue Federalist Society - you're so out-of-touch with all this "Constitution" blither-blather.
Besides, it conflicts with the narrative.
BIG GOVERNMENT SECURE