<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Prof Obama&#8217;s Law Exams &#8211; Black Set Asides</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 03:34:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnMG</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121533</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnMG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121533</guid>
		<description>wittejd;  aka Barack H. Obama</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wittejd;  aka Barack H. Obama</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liberals Make Great Speedbumps</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121419</link>
		<dc:creator>Liberals Make Great Speedbumps</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 06:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121419</guid>
		<description>wittejd ,

You&#039;re PROUD of being a lawyer?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wittejd ,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re PROUD of being a lawyer?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Odie44</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121329</link>
		<dc:creator>Odie44</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121329</guid>
		<description>Wittejad - 

Nice attempt at being &quot;elite&quot;. Clearly you didn&#039;t take English 101 in any form, hence your inability to know the difference between &quot;subjective&quot; and &quot;objective&quot; content - which is the purpose of SG posting this. If you are trying to say every &quot;elite&quot; law school shares the same content - why the hell are there rankings? And we all know rankings for law schools are based on 1) faculty 2) alumni support and 3) law firm placement.

I took tougher pre law , Constitutional law exams at SUNY. And turned down a Johns Hopkins scholarship, due to having to make a living. 

There is a reason why lawyers are a dime a dozen - and it isn&#039;t based on intelligence. Namely a guy who got a free pass due to his color, Harvard Law Review due to his color and &quot;magna cum laude&quot; due to his color. Do you think the first forced - black HLR editor was going to NOT get Magna Cum Laude???? When Obama got his hand out - it was the first time Harvard ever went away from grades... which of course we don&#039;t know because he has never released them, from Occidental, Columbia and Harvard, yet we know he was given  Magna Cum Laude...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wittejad &#8211; </p>
<p>Nice attempt at being &#8220;elite&#8221;. Clearly you didn&#8217;t take English 101 in any form, hence your inability to know the difference between &#8220;subjective&#8221; and &#8220;objective&#8221; content &#8211; which is the purpose of SG posting this. If you are trying to say every &#8220;elite&#8221; law school shares the same content &#8211; why the hell are there rankings? And we all know rankings for law schools are based on 1) faculty 2) alumni support and 3) law firm placement.</p>
<p>I took tougher pre law , Constitutional law exams at SUNY. And turned down a Johns Hopkins scholarship, due to having to make a living. </p>
<p>There is a reason why lawyers are a dime a dozen &#8211; and it isn&#8217;t based on intelligence. Namely a guy who got a free pass due to his color, Harvard Law Review due to his color and &#8220;magna cum laude&#8221; due to his color. Do you think the first forced &#8211; black HLR editor was going to NOT get Magna Cum Laude???? When Obama got his hand out &#8211; it was the first time Harvard ever went away from grades&#8230; which of course we don&#8217;t know because he has never released them, from Occidental, Columbia and Harvard, yet we know he was given  Magna Cum Laude&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gipper</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121325</link>
		<dc:creator>gipper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121325</guid>
		<description>&quot;You people must not have gone to law school…. If you had, you would know what a law school exam is supposed to look like–hint: it’s not like anything you took at Southern Alabama Technical College.&quot; 

wittejd, I would not argue with you that this is not a law school exam. I feel it&#039;s a well-written exam, but I believe the moderator posted this exam not so bloggers could critique it, but to expose Obama&#039;s worldview of victimhood, inequality, and pervasive racism.

&quot;All of the stuff that is highlighted, [sic] are FACTS that must be applied to existing case law to come up with an answer–they are not political points!&quot;

Those facts tell us Obama&#039;s leanings, and so yes, those could be considered political points.

Ad hominem attacks and emotional appeals are tools of the weak counselor and are used whenever the defendant is guilty. Strong counselors use logic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You people must not have gone to law school…. If you had, you would know what a law school exam is supposed to look like–hint: it’s not like anything you took at Southern Alabama Technical College.&#8221; </p>
<p>wittejd, I would not argue with you that this is not a law school exam. I feel it&#8217;s a well-written exam, but I believe the moderator posted this exam not so bloggers could critique it, but to expose Obama&#8217;s worldview of victimhood, inequality, and pervasive racism.</p>
<p>&#8220;All of the stuff that is highlighted, [sic] are FACTS that must be applied to existing case law to come up with an answer–they are not political points!&#8221;</p>
<p>Those facts tell us Obama&#8217;s leanings, and so yes, those could be considered political points.</p>
<p>Ad hominem attacks and emotional appeals are tools of the weak counselor and are used whenever the defendant is guilty. Strong counselors use logic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1sttofight</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121312</link>
		<dc:creator>1sttofight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121312</guid>
		<description>wittejd ,
Why do you keep posting the same stuff? Are you not smart enough to think something up on your own?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wittejd ,<br />
Why do you keep posting the same stuff? Are you not smart enough to think something up on your own?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wittejd</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121307</link>
		<dc:creator>wittejd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obamas-constitutional-law-exams-pt-2#comment-121307</guid>
		<description>You people must not have gone to law school....  If you had, you would know what a law school exam is supposed to look like--hint: it&#039;s not like anything you took at Southern Alabama Technical College.  Did you take a gander at the length of the exam?  I&#039;m fairly certain that none of you have taken an exam for more than 4 hours in your life.  As for the test itself:  1) All of the stuff that is highlighted, are FACTS that must be applied to existing case law to come up with an answer--they are not political points!  The point of the exam is to argue from the point of view of the government AND the people involved--you don&#039;t score very high if you only argue one side; 2) the State of Nirvana is listed so that students don&#039;t think that the law of any particular state controls the result (note: this practice is common on every law school exam from Harvard to whatever crack community school you went to--provided they have law schools, which they probably don&#039;t); 3) I noticed that the moderator didn&#039;t take the time to look at the other questions, maybe you should read the WHOLE exam; 4) things like Obama described in the exam facts ACTUALLY DO HAPPEN!  I guarantee if any of you ever got in legal trouble, you would want someone who could answer questions like these.

As someone who actually attended a law school ranked higher than Chicago (NOT very many of them), I can tell you that these are well thought out, comprehensive, and challenging examinations.  Lest I forget, that this one examination determined the ENTIRE grade of the person taking it---try working under that pressure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You people must not have gone to law school&#8230;.  If you had, you would know what a law school exam is supposed to look like&#8211;hint: it&#8217;s not like anything you took at Southern Alabama Technical College.  Did you take a gander at the length of the exam?  I&#8217;m fairly certain that none of you have taken an exam for more than 4 hours in your life.  As for the test itself:  1) All of the stuff that is highlighted, are FACTS that must be applied to existing case law to come up with an answer&#8211;they are not political points!  The point of the exam is to argue from the point of view of the government AND the people involved&#8211;you don&#8217;t score very high if you only argue one side; 2) the State of Nirvana is listed so that students don&#8217;t think that the law of any particular state controls the result (note: this practice is common on every law school exam from Harvard to whatever crack community school you went to&#8211;provided they have law schools, which they probably don&#8217;t); 3) I noticed that the moderator didn&#8217;t take the time to look at the other questions, maybe you should read the WHOLE exam; 4) things like Obama described in the exam facts ACTUALLY DO HAPPEN!  I guarantee if any of you ever got in legal trouble, you would want someone who could answer questions like these.</p>
<p>As someone who actually attended a law school ranked higher than Chicago (NOT very many of them), I can tell you that these are well thought out, comprehensive, and challenging examinations.  Lest I forget, that this one examination determined the ENTIRE grade of the person taking it&#8212;try working under that pressure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

