Whatever you think you have to say, you're probably wrong. But don't let that stop you.
Monday, October 09, 2006
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Umm. . . no.
Merely as a service to any who might find this link, please be informed that this is wrong. Specifically, #3 assumes entirely too much.
You may be one of those people who gets really fired up by the thought of spending 20 minutes with overworked attorneys whose sole purpose over the course of an interview is to not fuck anything up. You might spend 30 minutes each morning in front of a mirror slapping yourself and talking dirty to your inner child in an effort to convince your ego that you really need this piece of approval. In fact, the thought of masturbating to Johnnie Cochran's closing argument may be just what you need to get through your Tuesday oatmeal. If this describes you, then by all means schedule the maximum number of allowed interviews. And get the fuck away from me.
"If you are on Law Review, have a good GPA, and can exhibit basic social skills", then you should not be posting interviewing tips to the general populace, who now hate you. If you meet those three criteria, then just shut the hell up about interviewing and get back to memorizing Trivial Pursuit cards in hopes of impressing Judge Boggs.
"[I]f you are not in the upper echelons, why put yourself at risk by under-scheduling"? Because nothing kills energy faster than hyper-quantification? If you're worried about job prospects, then (and only then) actually preparing for these interviews is critical. You have to be able to convince them that your C is Torts really is due to the fact that your childhood pet turtle, Quimby, ate your outline, your textbook, and your notes, and then died from overeating - but not before he turned your academic work into a trail of shit that left your Crim Law notes soggy and unreadable (which then led you to try sleeping with your Crim Law professor for a better grade, but that only served to piss off his wife, who happened to be teaching you Contracts).
Seriously - you can't learn anything about anyone from a 20 minute interview. Or a 4-hour callback. The only purpose they serve is to mark firms off of your list, not add them to. Much like reading a blog posting, the only thing to learn is that those talking all the time may or may not be complete douchebags.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
This could lead to a lack of job security
This dude deserves an accolade. Or a lobotomy, I'm not sure. Seriously, where were this guys delinquent friends that got him into trouble in the first place? How do you convince a buddy that he needs to steal from his Mom and then not throttle him in open court as he asks the judge for increased bail? Isn't an assault conviction worth it? Everyone deserves one "my buddy just needed his ass kicked" defense in their lifetime. This one qualifies.
I think he was just afraid to go home to his Mom. She was going to kick his ass and he knew it.
In better news, thanks to Amicus Curiae for a little love. I'm new and shiny (and she'll grow to love me), so thank for the faith.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Because Underage Drinking is Nonanalogous Prior Art
Please, God, don't let this kid come to UT Law.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Collar stays are the male business man's boob job. The similarities are startling: they're both plastic, those that care too much about fashion consider them at least quasi-mandatory, and they both can make things unnaturally pointy.
On the bright side, they also both make guys stiff in all the right places.