Res Ipsa Loquitur

Week round-up

2005-03-18T13:04:00.000-05:00

Happily, my class-week is done. Of course, there are a million things that need to be looked into/get done over the weekend, but the silver lining is that i dont need to get changed into something respectable for the outside world to do these things. Neither do i have to shower. That would be funny, if it weren't true.

I'm glad to note that my contract was done by noon, and after drafting a few more versions of the same, it was sent out to a very happy and grateful client. From the looks of it, I can make that draft contract the original one and be doen with that client file. Which leaves me with just one more client to work on for the rest of the semester. Suffice it to say, I am very happy about that.

My clinical for Charitable Organisations also conducted a seminar on how to start your own non-profit org last evening. It was a smashing success. We had a great turnout and people were *actually* interested in listening to what we had to say. The seminar was conducted by us students, me and seven others, and it was very satisfying to be able to deploy and impart the knowledge we had squirrelled away the last 2-3 years in law school. Finally, I don't feel like law school has been a total waste of resources. I think more such opportunities should be provided to bridge the gap between academia and the real world. Of course, if law school were just two years instead of the money-sucking three, the disconnect wouldn't be that obvious. But since capitalism in America is rife, we get to enjoy three blissful years of borderline poverty and beyond-the-thershold misery.

Something funny happened during my Trial Ad class the other day. See, when I went to Wildwood, NJ in summer, I was strolling along the boardwalk, chomping down funnel cakes and other unhealthy eats. I came across this T-shirt store that manufactured personalised tees. Obviously, that demanded immediate attention and I went in to explore that world and emerged with a tee that had the Starbucks logo, but within the circle of that logo, it also had the words "consumer whore". Classy, no? So I wore it the day I had my Trial Ad class, mostly because I hadn't done laundry in a few weeks. So I stand up to cross the witness for impeachment purposes, and the witness seems to be err... distracted. By that time I had forgotten what I was wearing, so I was a bit fazed and ordered her to pay attention to my questions, when she bursts out and says "I'm trying to, but it's a bit hard not to read your tee when it says 'Consumer Whore'!!" Embarrassing.

Alcohol

2005-03-16T13:28:00.000-05:00

I swear I didn't know my way around this quiz, but it's more or less accurate in its reading!

Bourbon
Congratulations! You're 109 proof, with specific scores in beer (40) , wine (83), and liquor (69).

Screw all that namby-pamby chick stuff, you're going straight for the bottle and a shot glass! It'll take more than a few shots of Wild Turkey or 99 Bananas before you start seeing pink elephants. You know how to handle your alcohol, and yourself at parties.

My test tracked 4 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 21% on proof

You scored higher than 84% on beer index

You scored higher than 88% on wine index

You scored higher than 87% on liquor index

Link: The Alcohol Knowledge Test written by hoppersplit on Ok Cupid

Via Screaming Bean

Relief

2005-03-15T18:35:00.000-05:00

I managed to draft the contract by noon. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Sweet relief. Prof thought I did a "great job overall", but of course, had some comments. I incorporated them and sent it back to her. Which means it's now time for me to put my feet up and relax. Oh sorry, I meant to say, "... time to prepare for Trial Ad". One down. A gazillion to go. Still a cause for celebration, 'innit?

My Presssssuresssss

2005-03-15T10:27:00.000-05:00

I have a draft contract to give birth to in the next 1.5 hours. I'm not even pregnant yet. In fact, I'm not even sure there's been the right chemical fluid interaction yet. Go me!

This whole process of law school sucks. I love the law. I love the intellectual stimulation I derive from it. I love learning about the myriad ways judges pull wool over an entire society, making them believe that their reasons supported their coonclusions and not the other way around (is it "around" or "round" here??). I love learning about the political process that in turn shapes the law. But what I don't love, is the drudgery of exams, the steadier-than-the-Olympic-flame flame in your belly burning bright for your quest to find jobs, and then pandering to all and sundry for both the exams and the jobs.

That's not hott.

Help!!!

2005-03-11T11:51:00.000-05:00

Any idea how I can move my sidebar to the side???

PS: It's all settled now. Obviously. I'm still re-constructing the site, but taking my time with it owing to abovesaid pressures.

Mishap

2005-03-11T11:44:00.000-05:00

Peeps, I tried to change the template without realising (stpid me) that I'd lose everybloodything on the page. I'm working on getting haloscan back on and the rest of the good stuff. Hang in there, yea??

In the meantime, how's the new template working for you all?

Back with a Bang-quiz!

2005-03-08T10:42:00.000-05:00

src="http://www.bbspot.com/Images/News_Features/2005/02/website/wikipedia.jpg" width="252" height="152"
border="0" alt="You are wikipedia.org You are a know-it-all. You are trustworthy, most of the time. You are versatile and useful. You like volunteering. You are free.">
Which Website are You?

Know-it-all....that's right! If only my grades reflected that.

Res Ipsa had left the building

2005-02-08T10:21:00.000-05:00

Owing to a friend's injury, I've had to take a break from blogging. As some of you know, that does NOT mean I was not slacking off, watching Superbowl, or reading your blogs. It just meant that I had additional work on my hands and needed some more time to catch up on school work. Said friend is a close one and needs help from a school mate. Enter Res Ipsa.

I will try to blog at least thrice a week for the next couple of weeks, but I don't wish to make any false promises. Have a good one, folks!

Tower of Babble

2005-01-26T22:24:00.000-05:00

I was conferring with my clinical partner this morning on when to meet, what materials to bring, et, when I made this mega-blunder - I said "I'm so stacked up Wednesdays and Thursdays, is it possible to do it early next week?". Stacked up?! What was I thinking?!?!

That morning blooper got me thinking about the many culturally inapprorpiate gaffes I've made in my time here. All at my expense.

Gaffe 1
So last winter, sometime around the end of February, I was telling 3L how sick and tired I was of being cooped up at home and how I miss the sunlight and the summer-all-year-round Singapore phenomenon. 3L, the good friend that 3L is, says spring is fast approaching and the days filled with the golden rays of the sunw ill be here soon enough.

Me: "That'll be awesome. I can't wait to walk the streets when that happens!!"

3L: "Walk the streets?!?!"

Me (wondering why walking is so alien to 3L): "Yea! I haven't done that in *so* long. I miss it!"

Of course, by "walking the streets" I meant literally walking on the streets. Enjoying the sun and the warmth. It would have been received perfectly well in other parts of the world. Trust me. I lead no such exciting life.

Gaffe 2
I was talking to some of my friends about vacationing abroad and saving money by staying with some friends while abroad. I was giving an example about how I'd done that in the past and saved a tidy sum.

Me: "Oh yeah, it's totally worth it. The minute you have a friendly chap someplace, take a vacation! I've shacked up like that before."

Friends: *lots of sputtering noises, together with incredulous expressions on faces*

Me: *looks totally innocent and thoroughly baffled*

Friends (after managing to find their tongues): You've shacked up just for vacationing??

Me: "Errr...sure...what are friends for??"

Friends: "We are never telling you where we live! Even though you may be smokin' hot!" (Ok, I may be making up that last bit....damn, I've never been good at lying!!)

Me: "Huh?? Why would you not want me staying with you?!"

And then it came out that by "shacking up", I meant "staying with"..."bunked with". A good laugh was had.

Snow at the Equator

2005-01-25T19:05:00.000-05:00

I was telling a friend over the weekend that the winter is even harsher for me since I have never experienced a weather below 70 deg. F. But that's incorrect. I also said, incorrectly, that I had never seen snow before coming to the U.S. There was once that I actually played in snow... in 85 deg. F. weather.

I remember vividly - I had just moved to Singapore at the age of 13. And there was this empty plot of land (VERY scarce in a tiny country like S'pore) next to a huge shopping mall, which, all of a sudden, saw a flurry of activity. I saw tents being set up, workmen swarming all over, huge containers being carted around. All a la circus. But no animals. Plus, the land was just too tiny to accomodate a full circus. And so, I was totally consumed by suspense.

Not for too long, though. Soon enough, there was a big banner proclaiming a unique experience in the snow for all us equatorial people. Obviously, I had to see what it was all about. When they opened up the mini "fair", I finally saw what they had been building the whole time - a snow tunnel!! It was this long-ish structure made of, I assume, ice coupled with tough snow...?? Anyway, it was this wonderful tunnel where you pay an admission fee and play in for an hour. There were plenty of little kids and a few teens, like me. The tunnel was built mostly with the kids in mind, but that didn't stop me from a little frolick on a real sultry, humid evening, right in the midst of the equatorial region.

Bollocks, Balderdash, and everything British

2005-01-25T16:17:00.000-05:00

I liked the alliteration. The post itself has nothing to do with Bollocls, Balderdash, or anything British. Sorry to disappoint. If I did.

I was going to post on something else at first, but this caught my eye. A new blogger with many many visitors, who, inconceivably, comment by the dozens. For *each* of the posts. The blog is a little over-the-top - racy, inconsiderate and quite frankly, jack-assish (not a word, I know). And yet it has generated enviable traffic. That makes me wonder whether the tabloids have it right - do people only get attracted to what is frowned upon? The blog degenerates the older students at law school, the foreigners, and the frat-boy wannabes. Notably, the blog also expresses extreme annoyance at Jeremy Blachman for deciding not to be a lawyer upon graduation.

Now, I don't know if the blog is another persona or a real person, but I just wonder how a patently offensive blog like that gets more visitors/readers and comments than the nicer bloggers who've been in the game a lot longer than just 2 months. Should we just give up and cave in to our baser nature which we've suppressed in the name of political correctness? Because, with the whole internet thing, anonymity has afforded users the luxury of indulging in an unabridged and unbridled passion for political incorrectness. Should we embrace that trend?

E-A-G-L-E-S, EAGLES!!!!!!

2005-01-23T14:00:00.000-05:00

The Philly Eagles are playing in the game which is a pre-cursor to the Superbowl. Against the Atlanta Falcons 9who don't merit their own link). Now, am not the greatest sports fan there is, and certainly not of any of the truly American sports. For example, football & baseball. But, that said, I love watcing the Superbowl series. There is something to be said about witnessing a man get wallopped while he's freezing his balls off, all the while sitting down comfortably in the living room eating a steaming bowl of chili with rice, wrapped in a cosy fleece blanket and watching the snow fall, adding to the 16 inches of snow already accumulated on the ground.

I like long sentences. Sometimes.

Much thanks to Ambivalent Imbroglio for giving a shoutout to my blog. AI is a veteran of the blogging kingdom, up there with Favorable Dicta and Jeremy Blachman. It's an honour to be mentioned on your site, Sir. *curtsies*

Taking a page out of AI's book, here are some of the blogs that I recommend reading. Apologies in advance if I have left anyone out. Underneath Their Robes is a brilliant find of mine. I liked its post with the Chertoff quiz. Class Maledictorian is another recent discovery. It's very noir and gothic, at least to me. Interestingly, she is the only one to break the secret code of anonymity by putting up a snap of herself. Gutsy indeed. Screaming Bean is a personal favourite of mine. She was the first person who commented on my blog right after Favorable Dicta introduced it on hers. How sweet!

E.McPan of The Neutral Zone Trap is someone I feel very connected to. Her school apparently had a C+ curve, which it recently switched to my school's B- curve. We are bound by empathy, although she doesn't know of me yet. A small detail :) Another special blog to visit is Favorable Dicta's good friend, Legal Quandry. Many of my inspirations for the quizzes I take come from her site. While am not sure that's a good thing, it makes me visit her blog again and again! As it so turns out, it's LQ's birthday today. Happy Birthday, LQ!

In other news, someone Aspiring to Become a Lawyer hates law school. Join the club, pal. His blog chronicles the agonising wait that all of us went through to get to law school. As does that of Anonymous Recent College Grad. I don't know how anonymous you'd get if your name is right up on your blog... unless it's a fake name... Hmm...

Alright folks, kickoff in a minute. E-A-G-L-E-S, EAGLES!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pot & Law

2005-01-22T13:06:00.000-05:00

Yesterday was the half-JD party, which I didn't attend. It's far too cold for me to venture out. And now we're being snowed in. We have a snowstorm till Monday We're supposed to get over a foot of snow within the next 40 hours or so. Nice.

So anyway, the half-JD thing. I didn't go because I didn't want to brave the weather, only to be greeted by bacchanalian revelry. Maybe over the summer, but certainly not in the dead of winter. Brrr...

The Deviant Lawyer has a post about why he changed his mind from doing criminal defence to something not so criminal. I used to think similarly, but I've started to change my mind. See, I think criminal defence is not so much about your client as much as it is to preserve the justice system. The fourth and fifth amendments were established to protect innocent people from police brutality and government over-reach. Time and time again, such infractions have occurred, thus justifying these amendments (and many more). Sure, you will have clients who may well be guilty of the crime they are charged with, but I view their representation as being more of representing the justice system in its entirety rather than that defendant.

I take a very utilitarian stance on this subject. I remember a "The Practice" episode (while I understand that I should know better than to take TV drama seriously, this illustrates my point beautifully) where a man was charged with murdering a nun, chopping her body to pieces and stashing them in his closet. The police found those pieces in his house while conducting an (later determined to be) illegal search. The issue was this: Do the pieces come in as evidence in a murder charge against him? The judge ruled not. The Prosecution and the church were devastated, as was the defence attorney, who had effectively represented her client.

I was horrified too, but think about this - if the evidence had come in, the police would have been granted latitude to go into anyone's house and conduct a search at any time at any place. And it's not like all policemen and policewomen (sorry, *had* to do that) are highly responsible and moral people. And so, we think whether it's justified to sacrifice small numbers to ensure that larger numbers' rights aren't infringed on. I realise that I am presuming certain citizens' rights are the same as certain others'. It might be a folly but how do we know who to discriminate against and who to protect and embrace?

Ultimately, a defence attorney's life is infinitely tough because of the moral implications it involves, but I think it is a noble job precisely because of it. There are slimeballs who make a mockery out of that nobility, thereby casting aspersions on the entire profession, but that exists in any vocation. Humans (and this may come as a surprise) *are* fallible, but it takes real courage to stand up for what you believe in and try to strive for the best that you can.

On a totally unrelated note, I will never be a defence attorney.

The Funny, the Bad, and the Ugly

2005-01-21T21:34:00.000-05:00

The Ugly
E.Spat mouths off about law school grades. Something very close to my heart. Too close for comfort.

I have spoken to more than a few people at Temple about the confounding grading system, and no one seems to have figured it out. I was talking with 3L,whose advice was: "Don't read or think about the material before class, but pay extra-close attention during the class. Ultimately, the professor wants to hear what he or she said in class. Not what you independently think about the issues."

Geinus said: "Check your brain at the entrance to law school. Don't read cases, don't give too much credence to what professors say, rely on commercial outlines instead. And take decent notes."

Kitten said: "Always read before class."

Kay said: "People who don't perform at law school exams aren't dumb. Not in the least."

Fuhrer said: "Pay attention in class. That's the best thing to do."

Res_Ipsa_Loquitur said: "Whaaaa...??"

The Bad
Think you can ever be happy? Hah!

The Funny
I stole this from someone's blog and now I can't remember which one. But honestly, I cried when I read it. Tears of laughter, mind.

Quote of the Day: Another prospect volunteered he probably should not be on the jury: "In my neighborhood, everyone knows that if you get Mr. Ballin (as your lawyer), you're probably guilty."

PS: I now remember whose site I stole that gem of an article from. Much thanks to Anonymous College Grad.

Lawyer ha ha ha

2005-01-20T23:21:00.000-05:00

My Trial Ad professor was talking about the 12 principles of successfully conducting a trial. One of them was the usage of themes throughout the trial. Any theme that the jury can wrap its mind around and take back with it into the room. So he's giving us examples of such themes deployed in the past, one of them being the
(in)famous "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit" (courtesy of Johnny Cochran for O.J.)slogan. And then he went on to give examples of themes that would have been vastly successful if they'd been used:

1. Clinton trial: "He cheats on his wife but that's his personal life."
"If there is no mess on the dress, he need not confess."

2. Unabomber trial: "If it didn't detonate, you must exonerate."

From another of my Trial Ad classes:

"During the Nuremberg trials, the panel for Goerring consisted of 4 lawyers, each from a different country. And according to the historian present at the trials, each of them had a questioning style representative of their country's character.

The American - questioning was bold and unique, but got into trouble every now and then.

The Britisher - ineffective on his own, but brilliant when bailing the American out.

The Frenchman - charming, but *absolutely* ineffective.

The Russian - heavy, steady, tank-based approach which, once got started, could never be stopped."

The professor was making a point about how you should never quarrel with the witness on cross examination. So he goes back to the Nuremberg trial for Goerring and tells us that the Russian was quarrelling with Goerring. Here's how:

Russian: Look at this document I'm about to hand you. Is this your handwriting?

Goerring: Yes.

Russian (Yelling at the top of his voice): Do you now confess to being a fascist bastard???

Goerring: No.

Russian: Look at this other document I'm handing you. Is the handwriting yours?

Goerring: Yes.

Russian (still yelling real loud): Do you now confess to being a fascist bastard???

Goerring: No.

The questioning apparently went on ad nauseum.

Egregious paradox

2005-01-20T17:48:00.000-05:00

Interestingly, Bush will fight America.

More later. Class at 6.

Test mania

2005-01-20T01:45:00.000-05:00

Courtesy of Screaming Bean :)

I'm a bully?!

2005-01-20T01:30:00.000-05:00

YOU ARE RULE 12(b)!
While you might be a defendant's best friend, you
aren't exactly polite to others. You have
seven separate grounds on which to dismiss a
plaintiff's case. You are a bit paranoid,
since if you fail to raise your 12(b)(2,3,4, or
7) in a motion or a pleading with one of the
other 12(b) defenses or a 12(e) motion, you
waive those objections for the rest of trial.
Some might say that 12(b) is the biggest bully
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but
hey, somebody needs to keep the peace. You
might not be the most popular guy in the
office, but you're probably the most important.

Which Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Thanks, Divine Angst

Capsuled autobiography

2005-01-18T23:32:00.000-05:00

I had to write a brief personal memo for my clinical - Representing Charitable Organisations. Here is what I came up with.

An international education and cultural background are two traits that make me stand out at Temple Law School. I completed my Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Sociology (dual major program) in Singapore four years ago. Although at the time I didn’t think too highly of Sociology, it has come to shape and mould my view of life and specifically, the legal arena. I am intrigued by the social dynamics, complemented by the political aspects of the social climate, that impinge vastly on how laws are made and what laws are made.

Aside from that sociological interest in the law, I am very keen on the impact law has on the business world, and vice versa. To further my education in this regard, I have been taking classes that have to do with commercial and corporate laws. Since education without pragmatism, in my opinion, is rather incomplete, I chose this clinical to give me the requisite “human touch” – to be able to deal with real life clients and real world legal complexities. I interact better with people with the aid of words, rather than words standing alone, and hence this clinical.

I have worked as a summer associate in two firms in Singapore. One was a boutique corporate/commercial firm while the other was a local commercial/corporate litigation firm. I thoroughly enjoyed the work handed to me at both places and gained invaluable experience dealing with actual clients and their legal issues. I am confident that this experience will greatly enhance my performance at the clinical.

My non-legal writing skills need some polishing up.

Tax Law can be funny

2005-01-15T11:05:00.000-05:00

A sentence in the nineth circuit Tax case reads, "In tax, as in comedy, timing matters."

I would've never thought of that analogy. It's inconceivble that Tax, specifically Corporate Tax, can be in way or other compared to humour. But there it is, the nineth circuit achieved the impossible. Kudos.

At least it got a chuckle out of me, not to mention a post, Saturday morning.

Welcome to zany schedules & a new trend

2005-01-12T15:07:00.000-05:00

My full schedule for this semester:

Monday - Corporate Tax: 2.30-3.45
Chapter 11 Corporate Reorganisation: 4.00-5.50

Tuesday - Nothing

Wednesday - Clinical: 9.30a.m.-12.30/3.00p.m.
Trial Advocacy: 5.30-7.30

Thursday - Corporate Tax: 2.30-3.45
Law, Science & Technology: 4.00-5.50
Trial Advocacy: 6.00-7.00

Friday: Early weekend

A three-day week? I'm speechless.

Of course, I have to work for my clinical during the other days of the week, as well as on my paper for Law, Science & Technology But what the hell. I still have only a three-day week!

I've only attended 3 of my 5 classes and they all sound interesting to me. Even better, my Chap.11 prof. told us flat out that he ain't following the ridiculous B- curve! Apparently he likes doling out A's & B's. He did say that every year there's one student who "just doesn't get it". I'm resolved not to be that student.

On a different note, has anyone noticed that the U.S. law bloggers seem to come from the top ranked schools? I must have read some 15-20 blogs, which in turn make references to other blogs, and the authors all seem to belong to the Ivy League schools. I tried to search, in vain, for bloggers from Temple. None. Apparently I'm the only one wasting my time jabbering away on cyberspace. Widener? None. Upenn? Plenty. Granted, I don't have much by way of a sample size to make such a statement, but it does seem like only the Ivy Leaguers are blogging. Is that true? I'll be very interested to know if my observation is flawed, so give a holler either which way!

In other news, Philly's radiomen seem to be taking a cheap shot at call centre employees in India. American men make Indian women cry. Paris & Nicky become high school teachers. Almost. And conservatives elsewhere grapple with internet porn.

Quote of the Day:
"A spokesman for Welsh Conservatives -- who stressed he had not seen the offending site -- said the problem arose when the Delyn conservatives took on a new Internet address but forgot to renew their ownership of the old name, which was subsequently snapped up by a pornographer. " (emphasis added... duh)

The end of Life as I know it

2005-01-09T14:56:00.000-05:00

Schools starts back up tomorrow. I hope my blog does not suffer an arrested development due to that all-consuming fact. Thus far, I've managed to keep to one of my resolutions, to blog regularly. I'm proud to say that I've blogged once a day this year. I'll be happy if I blog thrice a week starting tomorrow.

I'm gearing up to a real interesting semester. I have all of 2 exams!! *Res_Ipsa_Loquitur then proceeds to cheer, somersault, do a couple of backflips. Then sees stars* I'm in Temple's famed Trial Advocacy course, Chapter 11: Corporate Reorganisation (Yes, I'm not a product of the American (mis)spelling system), Corporate Tax, Law, Science & Technology (for which I get to learn to play poker! Yay!), and a clinical where I represent charitable organisations. Only Corp Tax & Chap.11 have exams. Of course, the other classes I have taken involve tremendous amounts of work throughout the semester, but at least my grade is not entirely decided by my performance over a mere 4 hours. Plus, it'd be cool to see the inside of a federal courtroom.

All my hours of watching Law & Order will finally pay off.

This is P R O F O U N D

2005-01-09T14:45:00.000-05:00

You are water. You're not really organic; you're
neither acidic nor basic, yet you're an acid
and a base at the same time. You're strong
willed and opinionated, but relaxed and ready
to flow. So while you often seem worthless,
without you, everything would just not work.
People should definitely drink more of you
every day.

Which Biological Molecule Are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

Oh dear me, how fussy can we get?

2005-01-08T20:01:00.000-05:00

I just remembered this rather funny and revealing incident that I must share. You know how everyone keeps telling you that the legal industry comprises of a bunch of WASPs roaming around with a stick firmly shoved up their asses? It's true. Apparently a dude was rejected a job, despite meeting with the hiring panel's approval, because his e-mail read keepingitreal@hotmail.com.

Scary.

Brevity is the soul of wit

2005-01-08T19:01:00.000-05:00

In trying to be witty, I give you this very short post for today. I had fun plugging away the numbers. It's fun, easy, and free. To a law student, the last is of utmost importance.

Thanks

2005-01-07T18:30:00.000-05:00

Thanks to all those who e-mailed me regarding the Sarbanes-Oxley project. However, it now looks like I may not be doing the project after all. Let's see how it goes. But thank you, definitely!

Spitting

2005-01-07T18:17:00.000-05:00

I have a number of gripes today. So prick up your ears and lend me your eyes.

1. This showcases discrimination at its worst. It makes me deeply ashamed to be a Brahmin and an Indian. It makes me want to create a tsunami and flood all those who discriminate at a time like this. I'm so cheesed off, I can't find a better way of articulating the utter disgust I feel. All I can do is apologise on behalf of my barbaric brethren. What can I say, they're supremely ignorant fools.

2. What on earth is wrong with men?! I thought while reading the abovesaid article that nothing could beat that. Only to find I was wrong. Is sex THAT important?! If he had waited a little longer, she wouldn't have protested. And he'd be a necrophiliac.

3. What is it with law students and Fear of Math? They can understand Latin in under a fortnight, but can't add a couple of 3-digit numbers without a calculator present? Temple has a couple of Tax professors for the basic Income Tax class and the top reason students cite for choosing one over the other is ... *drum rolls* math!!! So I was in the dreaded "math" class and all I remember doing in class was calculate 10% of $100. And then came the exam, and people got all panicky, worrying whether calculators were allowed inside the exam room. Well, they heaved a sigh of relief when it *was* allowed. I can only imagine how justified that concern was when we had to add $500 to $10,000. I just don't get it, how can a cohort of the nation's finest minds be this afraid of a bunch of numbers? It's not like we're asked to work on calculus or trigonometry. Why such an unproportionately distorted Fear of Math?

And then they wonder why American high schoolers are pathetic at Math compared to the so-called third world countries.

4. Jeremy's post on his law school advice to a high schooler made me think about the gamut of law schools in the U.S. Temple has a hands-on approach to teaching its students the Law (at this point, I realise that I spell "Law" with an upper case "L", but that's because I think it ought to be spelt that way. "law" doesn't look right. Maybe I allot it more respect than it deserves, but bloody hell, this is *my* blog! I'l spel things ani way i plees!!!). According to Jeremy, Harvard takes a more theoretical approach. I did learn things like where to sign your name on a real estate document, where a debtor's name should be reflected on a borrower's note, etc. Plus, we have clinicals which actually let students deal with real clients and real issues. I have friends who have represented Philly's transportation department in arbitration proceedings. Collectively taken, Temple's graduates come out with some real world idea of the legal practice and are able to hit the ground running. I guess the point of this post is that law schools come in many shapes and sizes and I am curious to know if there are any more methodologies out there.

I'm real proud of Temple Law School for its practical application of the Law in its classrooms. It's the reason why I love studying what I do.

I love my India

2005-01-05T12:35:00.000-05:00

Here is an article that extolls the many virtues of Indian cuisine. I guess I'm in no danger of losing my ripe old age to Alzheimer's. Neither will Fuhrer or 3L. Perhaps I should've had more sambar at home. Oh well, there's always Deep's frozen food :)

I have plenty on my plate today. Holidays are essentially over. I now have to sweat out a proposal for my professor for guided research this semester. I'm planning on churning out a paper on the famed Sarbanes-Oxley Act, but since I have never even looked at it, I'm finding it inordinately difficult to focus on a specific morsel of that delicious meal. I'd like to explore the ramifications of the Act on corporate lawyers and how, if, it has affected the code of ethics involved in the tense boardrooms of big corporate firms. But I was told that that's too broad. I need something a little narrower. And hence all the clueless reading. On the web. Any thoughts to help me out? Please e-mail me.

Revamp

2005-01-04T02:13:00.000-05:00

So I've been thinking about how law school can be improved. Currently it's 3 years, at the end of which the graduates are broke, insanely bored, and unprepared to face life as a lawyer thanks to the highly academic and theoretical 3 years preceeding the bar exam. Many of my friends and I agree, no, vehemently espouse, that law school ought to be pared down to 2 years. Brevity is good in everything. Trust me.

Further, in my opinion, law school ought to be taught in a series of legal research & writing classes. Perhaps not the first year, but certainly the second (and final) year. I spoke to a bankruptcy lawyer once who had never taken a class on bankruptcy and was doing just fine. What's essential in law school is not so much learning the content as much as to learn how to learn the content in any area of the Law. When I worked in S'pore last summer, I was researching on UK, Idonesian, and Singapore laws regarding contracts. What came in handy there was not actually understanding the contents as much as knowing where to find them. Thanks to legal research & writing. Learning how to read the statute and read cases and analyse the issues are what are crucial in practice. I had to read the Rules of Court in S'pore for my summer internship. Obviously nothing I had learned, substantively, in law school as a 1L ever came in handy for that. What did help me interpret and apply those Rules was having to read the Uniform Parent Act of California while writing my paper for LRW. It's ridiculous, in my not-so-humble opinion, that law school does not follow a more active methodology of teaching. Simply ridiculous.

That rant aside, I want to thank all those who wrote back, in more than one line, to my one-lined mail wishing all a happy new year. One of my new year resolutions is to reply to all those mails at least in matching lengths. Thanks also to those of you who took the time out to come by my site and give me your input. It's highly appreciated. Perhaps if more of you who read my blog left an indication (no matter how tiny) that you read it, I might be better motivated to add to the palty content. Isn't that nice of me? Decidedly nice.

I just got back from my New Jersey trip with my brother. It was a very nice, fulfilling and quiet week that I spent there with my aunt, uncle, cousin, and brother. A very quiet new year's eve, for a change. Got to talk to most of my close relatives, which was nice. All in all, a really nice week just sailed by.

Now I'm back in the madness of the week that's a precursor to law school chaos. Books to buy, classes to axe (or treasure), research to do, resolutions to keep... Speaking of resolutions, one of them is to run the Broad Street marathon this time round. The last year's run was scratched due to my cold feet just prior to exams. Not so this year. No sireebob. This year I'm going to start preparing soon, for both the run and my exams. I already started on the former, and the latter will start being worked on the moment school starts.

I feel like the Spring semester is going to be my semester. I'm going to own it. After 3 semesters, crazy ones, at Temple Law, I finally feel like I know what needs to be done to get those dreaded letter grades. At least, I think I do. I need to wait for my grades to come in before I can affix my stamp of approval on my own opinion. But I'm reasonably certain that I know what law professors generally want to see in the exams. But since I'm not that certain of it, I have also taken precautions by opting for writing classes and other non-exam classes.

For example, this semester, I have Trial Advocacy (for which, am proud to say, Temple is the nation's best school). Instead of a 4 hour exam at the end of 4 months of slogging, during which you lose half your brain regurgitating what the other half managed to cram, I'll have a full fledged trial. I'd better start getting over my cold feet on that one. But you know, having been a Toastmaster and a debator, that really should'nt faze me. Much. Besides, that'll keep me on my toes all semester long. And I'll learn the Rules of Evidence heaps better. That should help me when it comes time to sit for the unbearable Bar Exam.

In addition, in my quest to avoid exams, I have a guided research paper and another class which is a writing seminar. I realised that I tend to perform better on paers than on exams. Ergo, these classes. But I also have 3 other classes which I have exams for. The 3 tough ones - Corporate Reorganisation (Chap 11 Bankruptcy), Corporate Tax, and Cyberlaw & Policy. The last is actually a split class, meaning I derive 60% of my grade from my exam and 40% from work put in during the semester. All in all, I'm looking forward to this semester. It's going be a crazy one, with my full 15 credits' worth of classes, and one crammed with 6 classes instead of just 4 or 5, and also a semester chock of classes that require short term attention throughout the 4 months. But that's precisely why I chose this schedule.

Can't wait to start.

2005

2005-01-02T14:25:00.000-05:00

My title has nothing to do with my post, but I hate not having a title. Here is a really interesting, disturbing, and revealing post about the legal profession. I have myself been concerned about the subject, but never thought of writing on it. This is the next best thing. Enjoy.

New Year Resolutions

2005-01-01T00:01:00.000-05:00

1. Be a straight A student.

2. At least try to be.

3. Run the Broad Street Marathon.

4. Run.

5. See people run.

3. Blog regularly.

4. Blog decent.

5. Blog.

Nice.

Hasta la vista baby...

2004-12-23T04:30:00.000-05:00

And am back.

Rather long hiatus there, but what with the mind-numbingly catastrophic flurry of exams, I just had no time, nor the patience. More the latter. But the former sounds better.

I'm not going to spend too much time talking about the dreaded exams, but suffice it to say they're over. For now. I've been unwinding since last Thursday and I can go on unwinding for the next fortnight. Since it's proper winter right now, with the weather dipping below freezing, there hasn't been much by way of an incentive for me to step out, so basically I've just been running to and from Blockbuster to watch movies at home. Oh, I also saw Ocean's Twelve last week... during the day... a luxury in and of itself. Imagine, a law student, watching a movie....during the day!!! Hallelujah! But anyway, the movie was good as sequels go, but nothing to beat its predecessor. Ocean's Eleven had class and style, this one was classy too, but lacked a bit of the ... zinginess (admittedly a stupid, probably fictitious, word, but sounds about right) that the first one had. But worth watching.

On Wednesday, right after my Secured Transactions exam (which was a Bitch), I headed out to dinner with Fuhrer, 3L, Kay, Andy, & (later) Pete. We went to a Korean restaurant in Center City. It was really good, the dinner. Accentuated by the looming winter break. Bulgoki in a manner I have never had before. A tofu dish that was really yummy. And a bi-bim-bab prepared in a stone bowl. Real good stuff. I then treated myself to Haagendaaz ice cream - vanilla. That's right...I ate my heart out. And I'm going to eat my heart out losing all that holiday fat I've put on.

That's about all that's worth writing ... I think. I'll have more next week since I'll be going to NJ and spending time with my aunt, uncle, brother, & cousin. So till then, merry christmas.

Superficial introspection

2004-11-21T23:33:00.000-05:00

I have been feeling real guilty the past month or so, and the reason is my sloppy blogging trend. So last night, on my way to watching the movie 'The Incredibles', I was thinking about why I feel guilty over something that is purely voluntary, doesn't have much of an audience, and has no parameters attached to it. And I came up with nothing.

I started blogging predominantly because of being inspired by people like KampongChicken and other fellow bloggers, more diligent, far more, than me. I read their blogs and found them to be a wealth of knowledge. Equally important, I found them to be an excellent means of communication. Well, my blog may be informative, but it certaintly hasn't done much by way of communicating with those far away. I know some of you out there have read my blog entries and have even made an attempt to involve me in discussions over them, so thanks to you! It's greatly appreciated. But for the most part, most people still contact me either via e-mail or phone calls. My brother told me outright he's too lazy to read a certain blog entry when I directed him to it in reply to a question he posed. Now, that's funny :) And insulting. But funny.

And on my part, I'm too lazy to keep a religious account of the goings-on in my life to the extent I intended to. The reason being, when I am inspired to write about something, it's an inappropriate time, and when i do have the time to, the inspiration runs out. Either I've found an outlet, or laziness has found me. Whichever way you slice it, the blog doesn't get done the same as the KampongChickens of the world.

So, I've come to the conclusion that because the purpose for starting my blogging career has largely been defeated, I'm going to not feel guilty for not maintaining a constant stream of blog posts. Phew.

That said, my week was a good one. I went out to a pizza joint with 3L & Fuhrer for the world's spiciest wings. Following that, I went to UPenn's bookstore and bought 'Life of Pi', a book on the Freemasons and Templars and their history, and a whodunit. That bookstore was HUGE, but due to time constraints, we kept to a small section of the ground floor. But the plan is to return there over the winter break. Now, that's something to look forward to when I'm outlining for Tax or Evidence!

Last night, I tried to watch 'The Incredibles', but halfway through the show the power got cut off, so the theater was emptied and we were all given free movie passes to come back anytime to either finish the rest of that movie or to watch another one. I'd like to watch 'National Treasure' (despite Nicholas Cage), but since 'The Incredibles' was actually a really good movie, I'd want to go back to finish it up. I'm reserving it for the Thanksgiving break, along with Secured Transactions, Tax, Evidence, and Business Associations. Yay.

2004-11-16T01:33:00.000-05:00

Came across an Economist article that was insightful. After reading it, Samuel Huntington's The Clash of Civilisations comes to mind.

Still ranting

2004-11-12T01:59:00.000-05:00

I meant to post this article some time back. But as usual, I got all worked up about it when I read the article (in class), but then the fire died down when I could actually write about it. But it's a very interesting article and anyone interested in following the goings-on related to the 2004 American election must read it. It portends a very disturbing trend in the current American political scene - the nexus between politics and organised religion.

Where the political aspirations of this country are based on the stark (at least, in theory) separation between the church and state, there seems to be a sharp deflection from that theory in recent years. The 2004 Presidential election left no room for doubt on the importance of the Christian vote in American politics. The revulsion of homosexual marriage in this country seems to have overshadowed almost every other issue brought to the election table: healthcare, foreign policy, Presidential accountability to the American populace. Amazing. Jon Stewart had a riproaringly funny episode of the Daily Show on the election results; he said "We can tolerate prisoner abuse in Iraq, a bad global reputation, but somehow the idea of dudes kissing doesn't seem right." Or something to that effect. Never been too good at quoting from memory. Those interested can, am sure, look it up online.

So aside from following politics, I've been busy with school stuff. Exams are just around the corner and classes are nearing the end, moving steadily to those review classes that spell the end of law school parties. So I'm trying to cram in a couple of movies inbetween - The Incredibles & Bridget Jones' Diary: The Ege of Reason. Will probably watch Saw on dvd. Aside from that, not much happening on the social scene. Probably going to a comedy move marathon this Saturday. That should be a nice change, so am looking forward to it.

Hmm, that's all. Ta.

(Anonymous) Quotable Quotes

2004-11-06T17:17:00.000-05:00

From the mouths of law students:

"Last Wednesday, a Curse was broken. This Wednesday, a curse has been cast on the entire world."

"I told ya Bush was gonna win!"

"I don't want some small town hicks telling me what I can and can't do with my life!"

(On the results): "AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH"

(On the subject of abortion): "If sparing the agony of having a deformed or otherwise seriously abnormal child is a justification for abortion, then I have a shotgun I can take to that child! Is that justified post-birth?!"

"I agree with everything Justice Thomas says."

(On welfare): "I used to be a raging liberal till the time I was standing in line, a poor student, waiting for basic food items, and a woman with food stamps was in front of me, buying lobsters."

"There is a website called Global Vote, and only 10% of the people around the world want Bush as President."

Greenday - I hope you had the time of your life

2004-11-06T17:05:00.000-05:00

Goes for both Kerry & Edwards. They had their day, not in court, but in the voting booth, and they lost, graciously. Kerry more than Edwards. But anyway, on the day of the results, I lopped off my hair. Not all of it, but most. I guess I now look like Edwards. Does that qualify as a show of support for the candidate?

Tax is interesting today. We're learning all about the tax consequences for married and single people. It's interesting to see how the Judeo-Christian views of the early settlers have seeped into every single facet of American life. This election was won on those values. Not the war on Iraq, as most ppeople thought. Even the Federal Income Tax Code reflects (and reaffirms) the traditional notions of the Christian faith. Amazing. And then the rest of world looks upon America as the idol of Modernisation and Progressiveness and the separation of the Church and State. Balderdash.

What's even more amazing is Arafat's "death" in the media. I don't envy the reporter who made a colossal ass of himself thinkign he was smart enough in unnerving the President by throwing the Arafat question yesterday. But I guess ultimately, Arafat's not in the running anymore. I can't imagine someone in a coma coming out to lead a huge mess of a situation. Even with our modern medical advancements and technologies, that ain't possible.

Having talked of amazing events, I'd like to turn my (brief) attention to scary events. Three Supreme Court justices more or less due to kick the bucket during the Bush administration. Starting with the Chief Justice. With 3 vacancies in the next four years, it forms a bleak picture for civil rights in this country. Whilst the Chief Justice is a renowned conservative, he is yet known to be one who stays true to the Constitution. The danger of replacing him begins if the President replaces him with a conservative of the stature of Justice Thomas. Justice Thomas was the one Justice who approved the President's new classification of 'enemy combatants' and desired to give the government almost unlimited power in dealing with those whom it suspects of waging a war of terror against the United States. The other 2 vacancies are those of Justice Souter and Justice O' Connor, both known to be liberal Justices. If the 3 Justices are replaced by Bush's nominees, which isn't an impossible feat since the Republican party has now solidifed its hold on both the Senate and the House of Representatives, Roe v. Wade and Texas v. Lawrence will be the first to be ousted.

Not good.

After a long hiatus...

2004-11-01T18:52:00.000-05:00

Anyone who happened to amble in, only to be met by a blank slate, has my sincere apologies. It has been a rough fortnight, and a busy one to boot.

First off, my condolences to isd_girl and her family. I am sure she will heal in time, in fact, she sounded MUCH better the last time I spoke to her, but for now, anytime she wants to talk, am here.

I read a great article at Economist. It was one of the best articles regarding the two Presidential candidates that I have read in a long time. Because it's the Economist, the opinions expressed tend to be more conservative, but also because it's the Economist (which is based in London), their opinions aren't as tainted as those one would expect to read in the American press. I disagree with the opinion-article in a couple of areas but as opinion-articles go, this one is concise, coherent, and cogent. Definitely worth reading from top to bottom.

Yet another useful Presidential Election site is hosted by WashingtonPost. This provides a comprehensive one-site-stop collection of information for tomorrow's election. My personal feeling is that Bush will win. Narrowly. But he will prevail yet again. There is a law school election party tomorrow evening when the votes start being counted...I might go for it, just to lose myself in the election mania. Coming from a totally politically apathetic country, I see the 2004 election as a brilliant experience for me to vicariously feel the election fever. After all, this election does have some effect on me too, as it does the rest of the world. As JP rightly said, "We should allow the rest of the world to vote for the American president; it affects all of them."

Aside from that exciting event, I was also lucky to witness a 86 year old baseball Curse be smashed to smithereens. The Red Sox won, finally, after selling off Babe Ruth back in 1918. It wasn't as exciting agame as would have liked it to be, but there were some tense moments. It was exhilarating to see the crowd go wild at the end of the game when Red Sox made easy the end of the ninth inning. The TV showed clips of people in Iraq watching the game - it said they were the multinational task force....somehow I can't quite imagine the Brits or Aussies watching Baseball....but I suppose they'd rather watch the Curse be broken than watch their buddies and comrades be broken.

Signing out here, more, hopefully, in the next day or two.

URL Time

2004-10-21T13:19:00.000-04:00

Only in America... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3762028.stm

For my gamer friends: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3762350.stm

Baseball!!

2004-10-21T13:05:00.000-04:00

I saw baseball history being made last night. The Red Sox thrashed the Yankees 10-3, making it the first team in baseball history to win from 3-0. Delightful moment right there. Rooting for the underdog is always fun. Not that I knew too much of the techincalities of the game to really know what I was rooting for...but baseball is sufficiently similar to cricket, so it wasn't too bad.

After a couple of really bad days, I spent Wednesday morning sleeping in. Penalty: missing Evidence. It's tragic cos I love my professor, she livens up the class so much, but sleep is a necessity. Especially after sleeping a grand total of 8 hours in 3 days. Sometimes law's gotta take a backseat, but the guilt never goes away. I heard someone say Law is like a jealous mistress. ALthough I'd never know what a jealous mistress would be like, the sentiment holds good. Once u have a good time on the sly, outside of The Law, the guilt never fully washes off. No matter how much u justify it. I will pass out if I don't eat NOW...Nope, U gotta stick with your Business Associations reading. Living somes second.

The tax competition is really hotting up. So is my RA deadline. And then there are my classes. Constantly clamouring for attention. We are allowed a coach for our tax compettion, so the professor in charge called all of us and held a meeting to get us introduced to our coach. This was 5p.m. Monday...I was so tired and hungry, but had to stay back 4 hours to meet the coach....who never showed up. The prof apologised profusely and said she's gonna make the coach beg us, etc etc. Turns out, it was her fault; she got the day wrong. So then we had a meeting on Tuesday at 5. That day was worse cos I had still not had decent sleep nor food...and that was the day I have classes back to back till 4. We then had a tax library tour...and waited till 5.30 for the coach to show up. Never did. Prof apologised yet again and swore she'd make the bloke pay. When I get back home, I find an e-mail saying it was her fault yet again! Enough said.

So last night I stayed up a bit to watch the Red Sox-Yankees game and The Daily Show. It was funny, but it felt too short. Felt more like a 10 minute show instead of at least 20. Cheating.

Today there's a mock presidential debate at school. My Tax prof is debating for Bush another prof is debating for Kerry. That's on at 4....I'm attending it. It sounds like fun, I'll know if it indeed is later.

2004-10-18T07:20:00.000-04:00

It's 4.05 a.m., and am still unable to sleep. I'm just going to make this an all-nighter.

The weekend was good. I finally managed to go shopping for some sweaters and a pair of warm and cosy jeans. All I have to do now is to get a trench and a blazer. I finished the weekly Secured Transactions reading, which was amazingly short. Not littered with too many Code sections. And then some prep for the ABA Tax competition. This year's problem has apparently been much simplified. I still see stars when I read it. But it promises to hold me mesmerised - it's about a corporate stock plan and its tax consequences. Unfortunately, it involves reading a chapter in my Tax book that isn't covered in my syllabus! Neither is the code provision. So much for that. But it still looks intriguing and if I want to pursue my other plan of becoming a tax attorney, this will definitely come in handy.

Sunday morning SB called and we spoke for a while. SB's parents are in town, so I got to talk to mom for a bit too. It was a weird conversation espcially as we hadn't caught up in some time, plus SB sounded tired. It didn't help that I was in a rush either. For a baptism in the afternoon. Interesting experience. The baby was adorable and well-behaved. Thank god.

And then there was dinner with 3L, Mc-O & Em at Penang. That restaurant has got to be my favourite in Chinese food. Had some yummy food and company, but had to cut the evening short to get home and read Evidence and some more RA work. That stuff just keeps getting more and more engaging. Maybe it's the pay. Nah, it's the substance. Yup, substance. No, really. Substance.

It's 4.20. Adios.

2004-10-18T06:45:00.000-04:00

I decided to get a jumpstart on my Monday, so here I am, at 3.21 a.m., wide awake after reading some of my RA work.

Temple Law School now has a (resuscitated) SALSA - South Asian Law Students Association. Just like APALSA or the JALSA, SALSA is a national organisation, but apparently Temple's SALSA died a couple of years ago when Indians decided they didn't like Temple. This year though, there's been a huge influx of Indian students and one of my friends decided to co-found the SALSA at Temple. I attended its first meeting, which had a decent turnout, surprisingly. I guess the free pizza and sodas helped. I was so impressed by the pizza's quality that I left the meeting as SALSA's Academic Chairperson. It's not official yet....I don't know if it'll be officialised even. But that's the position I hold in APALSA and since APALSA and SALSA are sister organisations and plan on making headway together, I'm assuming I am more or less "officially" the Academic Chair of both.

The networking banquet I attended was very very good. It was held at Montgomery McCracken's office premises, specifically in one of their conference rooms. It was gorgeous. An impressive library, awesome view of the city, and a heavy-duty ornamental chandelier were some of the room's perks. If I were a prospective client who conferred with the associates/partners in that roomm, I'd sign up for life. Even as I'd pay through my nose. The view alone would be worth it.

There were plenty of Asians at the event - both students and practioners. I was talking to a couple of associates from Montgomery McCracken and one of them was a bankruptcy lawyer. My conversation with her proved very illuminating. So I guess am still on course with my bankruptcy dreams. That came out all wrong, didn't it.... But anyway, attending the networking event truly opened my eyes to how the job market in the U.S. works. It's not so much your paper qualifications (although they are mandatory) as much as your contacts, your connections. I'd heard about this but I really understood the importance of the adage that day. Race plays a crucial role in the business community here, and hence all the SALSA, APALSA, BLSA, etc. In fact, one of the primary crowddrawers of these organisations is the contacts they provide their members.

When I attended the first ever SALSA meeting, it was astonishing to see how strong the bond is amongst the Indian community here. They are totally American, in accent, in lifestyle, and of course, aspirations, but they are still, at heart, Indians. There was an instant comaraderie between the people who attended the meeting. Such a bond is apparently what lies out there in the job market too. It seems to be a popular refrain here that successful people always want to see others of "their ilk" succeed. The Chinese and Korean communities want to see the younger generation achieve more. The South Asian community likes to see its youth set the bar even higher. The first thing that the founders (of SALSA) said at the meeting was that they knew a lot of successful South Asian lawyers who would like to extend a helping hand to other South Asians in getting jobs. There is even a mentorship program out there for South Asian students! It seems incredible to me that a nation that has a strong identity independent of race should then have such strong intra-racial ties.

Not that am complaining. Of course. Bring on the jobs!

Second & Third Prez Debates

2004-10-14T14:36:00.000-04:00

My bubble was burst. Excitement drained. Cynicism oozed in. The second debate was probably one of the longest and most boring debates of all time. I thought it'd be better than the first because it was to focus on domestic issues and the audience posed questions instead of the moderator. But the axiom that sequels do not better the original held. The questions were fake, the questioners were fake, domestic issues were given cursory treatment, and the candidates sounded like a broken record.

There were plenty of numbers and names mentioned, but with both candidates spouting figures a mile long, it didn't make any difference. If Kerry stated a figure on healthcare, Bush would rebutt with a figure on tax. If Kerry declared a heavy figure on education, Bush would fire off another on... tax. If Kerry quoted a figure on tax, Bush would meet him with a figure on... tax. Yea, that's how exciting it was.

However, my law school friends disagreed with me. I watched the second debate with Godfather, JP, Pyromaniac, 3L and Token, all (except one) law students. JP and 3L especially thought "Kerry wiped the floor with Bush". I guess. BBC disagreed, saying Bush drew even with Kerry because of this debate. My friends' view was that Kerry's plan and vision were missing from his campaign and he removed that deficiency with this debate. Also, they felt the repetition on the war in Iraq was necessary because that's what Bush screwed up most. I was just disappointed not to see a more engaging debate. I would've liked to see more details, what the Patriot Act does (or doesn't), what the figures they used mean, how Kerry would create more jobs, etc. None of that, unfortunately. All in all, a terribly disappointing and bleak debate.

Oh, Bush displayed more bluster and bullying. Big deal.

The third debate was much better. Both candidates came off stronger, Bush, particularly, improved tremendously. He must've worked hard. By coming in on Sundays.... if that's what it took (those of you who missed the season premiere of Saturday Night Live...watch the spoof of the first debate. Brilliance.). He'd lost some of his overt aggression. But he promptly replaced it with weird laughter. Was that to show the audience that Kerry wasn't scaring him? Don't think it helped.

This debate focused a lot on domestic issues. I was glad to see the moderator throw some hard and controversial questions at the candidates. The questions on a constitutional amendment on the issue of gay marriages, abortion, outsourcing, and Kerry's Catholic faith were hard-hitting and, to me, tested the true mettle of the candidates. Kerry showed the most polish and intelligence in tackling those questions. I liked the fact that he never once openly insulted Bush and indeed, paid him a compliment. But he didn't back down on picking holes in Bush's policies either. The right balance of being competitive and respectful simultaneously. It says a lot about the man. Kerry ultimately comes off a nice bloke. If the American public don't want a nice man at the helm, then Bush walks off with the vote.

Quotes from the debates:

Kerry: "Orwellian label from the sky"

Bush: "armies of compassion" (my personal favourite)

Transcript of the third (and final) debate:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/debate_1013.html?referrer=email

No more URLs

2004-10-07T13:21:00.000-04:00

Really. I get free food tonight. Hosted by a large firm in Philly (Montgomery McCraken), it's a banquet/dinne, much touted as a worthy networking opportunity. So am going to be all dressed up (if you call a blac k suit "dressed up") and ready to kiss some corporate ass. But basically this just goes to show that so long as you dangle free food and a possible job opportunity, law students are game.

This is the first event of its kind for me, so I'm looking forward to it. I'm sure I'll have more to say on the banquet tomorrow, when I'll, hopefully, have some material on the second Presidential Debate too. Otherwise, my day looks mundane - Business Associations at 11 & Secured Transactions at 1. Oh, I got a Research Assistant position with my ST prof. I can finally afford to eat thrice a day. (Hope people know I'm kidding....)

It's an interesting topic, regardless of any monetary benefits - lawyers' liability to third parties. I guess to a lot of people, that sounds dry as dead hay, but I think it's a great topic, and most certainly one that directly impinges upon me..or the future me, to be more precise. I'm looking forward to starting work on that project. Stay tuned for more on the same. I promise to bore you.

Some more URLs

2004-10-07T13:10:00.000-04:00

I scoured the Economist a few days ago and found these:

Human rights & the Post-911 U.S.A. - http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2173160

China's new power structure - http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3220315

An unexpected twist on stereotypes in business - http://www.economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3209530

VP debate URLs

2004-10-07T13:00:00.000-04:00

For a complete transcript:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/debate_1005.html

An interesting article on some contents of the debate:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3723090.stm

Vice Presidential Debate - 5 October

2004-10-07T00:17:00.000-04:00

There's no way to soften the blow - Edwards kicked the Democratic party on the shin. And again. And again.

The debate started off with a question on Iraq. If I had had my eyes closed, I would have thought it was a re-cast of the first Presidential debate. Unfortunately, I had my eyes open. As well as my ears. And I heard this, loud and clear:

" (T)he reality you and George Bush continue to tell people, first, that things are going well in Iraq -- the American people don't need us to explain this to them, they see it on their television every single day."

One expects better from a lawyer, a high profile lawyer at that. The implication that the American people can see that things are going well totally undermined, in my opinion, any credibility Edwards might have had as making an able VP. Edwards is already shadowed by a strong public sentiment that he might be overwhelmed and incapable of handling that important a job. For him to then start off his part of the debate with a mistake as glaring as that, just cannot augur well. Not like the rest of it was all that great.

Every question he fielded was answered in the same manner - John Kerry's manner. In John Kerry's words.

We lost more troops in September than we lost in August; lost more in August than we lost in July; lost more in July than we lost in June.

There are Republican leaders, like John McCain, like Richard Lugar, like Chuck Hagel, who have said Iraq is a mess and it's getting worse.

They also didn't have a plan to win the peace. They also didn't put the alliances together to make this successful.

Anyone who has seen the first Presidential debate would recognise those words, those themes. They made the debate substantive, meaty. They made John Kerry look good and credible, for the first time, for all to see. Not as a flip-flopper, but as someone who, in Kerry's own words, "has a plan". All that was great. But hearing the same words 4 days later, by a VP-hopeful, wasn't all that great.

Not just did he utter those words, his body language also smacked of John Kerry Preparatory School. I suppose one can't say much about that in words, so I'm going to let that be.

Cheney, on the other hand, came across as a polished and self-assured guy. He seemed to have the facts at his finger-tips and used them well against Edwards' rather personal and aggressive attacks. His political experience spoke volumes, even though he didn't. What I remember most about Cheney's side of the debate was his response (or the lack thereof) to the question of gay marriage. Edwards had just said that he respects and admires the fact that Cheney and his wife have come out in the open about their daughter being homosexual. In reply, Cheney said:

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, let me simply thank the senator for the kind words he said about my family and our daughter.
I appreciate that very much.

IFILL: That's it?

CHENEY: That's it.

And that was it. That, to me, indicates Cheney's strength as a person. Instead of weasling his way around the issue, he chose to not drag his family further into the fray. He picked the right moment to do this, and chose the right manner to boot. His body language spoke louder than his reply. He came across as a down-to-earth guy, one who does not bother much with ideals, leaving them, instead, to the President, and yet, someone who has convictions and stands by them. He was a tough opponent to beat in yesterday's debate. And Edwards didn't beat him.

And yet, Edwards had his strengths. His forte, clearly, was domestic issues. I must admit, I missed a good chunk of the debate because I was so put off by the miserable quality of it. Fortunately, I caught the last 45 minutes of the debate - the domestic policy segment of it. And Edwards was stupendous. He showed his firm knowledge of the law in matters such as healthcare, gay rights, and taxes. I liked his response to the question involving flip-flopping - it was concise, hard-hitting, and yet, flowed very smoothly. I'm pasting the entire segment on flip-flopping below, so it might be a tad long. The question: What's wrong with a little flip-flop every now and then?

EDWARDS: Well, first of all, let me say that John Kerry has -- I can use his name now?

IFILL: Yes.

EDWARDS: OK. John Kerry has been, as have I, been completely consistent about Iraq. We've made very clear from the beginning -- and not an afterthought; we said it at the time -- that we had to confront Saddam Hussein and that we had to have a coalition and a plan to be successful.
And the vice president didn't say much about it in your earlier question, but Paul Bremer has now made clear that they didn't have enough troops and they didn't have a plan.
And the American people are seeing the results of that every single day, in spite of the proud and courageous service of our men and women in uniform.

Now, flip-flops: They should know something about flip-flops. They've seen a lot of it during their administration. They were first against the 9/11 Commission; then they were for it. They were for a department of homeland security -- I mean, they were against the Department of Homeland Security; then they were for it.

They said they were going to put $2 trillion of the surplus when they came into office aside to protect Social Security; then they changed their minds. They said that they supported the troops; and then while our troops were on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, they went to the Congress and lobbied to have their combat pay cut.

They said that they were going to do something about health care in this country. And they've done something: They've made it worse.

They said that they were going to fund their No Child Left Behind; $27 billion short today.

Over and over, this administration has said one thing and done another. This president said -- I listened to him the other night at his 2000 debate saying: I'm for a national patients bill of rights. I know something about this. John McCain and Senator Kennedy and I wrote it, got it passed in the Senate. We don't have a patients bill of rights because of one man today, the president of the United States. They've gone back and forth.

No bluster, no hesitance, very good flow. That's what we want to see more of, Mr. Edwards. Not an eager-beaver attitude, no rude interruptions, no repetition of Kerry's linguistic and physical styles at the podium.

One thing that bothered me throughout the debate was Edwards' seeming adoration of John Kerry. The number of times he mentioned Kerry's name and Kerry's ideology was mind-boggling. To me, it says he's looking at Kerry starry-eyed. I'm not sure I want a VP like that. I want someone who has his own opinions about issues, someone who respects the President but also recognises his flaws, someone who gives the confidence to the American populace that he will stand up for his convictions in the Oval Office. Just for the sheer diversity of ideas, I'm not sure I want a VP who seems to have boundless adulation for his President. I realise that there is an argument to be made for a co-operative VP, but I don't buy it. Edwards reminded me too much of a puppy that puts its master on a pedestal. And I don't want no dawg for a VP.

But then, am no American.

Monday blues

2004-10-04T12:55:00.000-04:00

Back to school after a restful weekend. Evidence at 11; hopefully it'll provide a good start to my week, academically.

I made the awesome-est tofu stir-fry, Indian style! Such good stuff....yummm... Since I made it in bountiful quantities, I don't have to worry about dinner/lunch for the next couple of days. That's a relief.

Attended a house party on Friday night - very good crowd. Law school people turned out in droves...not surprising since it was a law student who hosted it. Ventured out at 2.30am for some pizza and wings....hit the sack at 4..and was up by 10, reading for Secured Transactions. Great way to start a weekend, really. I was very productive all Saturday, finishing up my work for my classes this week. Am now more or less on top of it all. Boy, am I proud of me or what.

But the thing about law school is that just when u think you're done, something else shows up. The Pennsylvania Superior Court is holding a session at school tomorrow. Since that's earlier than my classes, it eats into my reading time, but hey, it's the PA Superior Court! Can't be missed for anything. I'm excited; as excited as I could be on a Monday morning. But, I console myself with the thought of Everwood tonight. Yup, good show - good plot line, acting, and idyllic scenery. Everything needed to make Monday night TV worthwhile. Chase away the Monday blues with Everwood. Right.

URLs

2004-10-01T23:36:00.000-04:00

For a complete trancript of the debate:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/debate_0930.html

I had hoped to put up a fellow blogger's post on the debate here, but he has taken his post off.

First Presidential Debate - 30 September 2004

2004-10-01T23:25:00.000-04:00

I was all fired up for my first ever live U.S. Prez debate last night. The Democrats Society at law school was getting together to watch the event but since it started so late (9.00 p.m.), I decided to give the public viewing a miss and go home. I caught the debate, all 90 mins of it. It was exciting and insightful - to the extent that anything political can be. I guess what was so refreshing about the event was that, for once, the candidates were going to speak without cribsheets - for the most part. No scripts, more or less. And it was interesting to see a lawyer beat the pants off an MBA graduate :)

I regret to say, Kerry made the first goof up - "Islamic Muslims". What the ...?! What other kind of Islamic people would u have?? The Islamic Hindus? Islamic Jews? He then followed that up with "... there are a list of things wrong..." It was disappointing to spot the initial mistakes from Kerry - a lawyer, and, in my opinion, the better candidate. But that said, Bush came back with some priceless gems. I didn't catch any bloopers on his part like "Islamic Muslims", but that's mainly because he... took.... his... time... in... answering... questions. He had so many pauses in between his words that they were pregnant, delivered, and begat their own offspring. It was actually painful to see his struggle for the right words.

Speaking of "right" words, what was with Bush's ubiquitous "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" refrain? It almost seemed like when he didn't have anything decent to come up with, he'd fall back on that mantra. The first time he used it, I have to admit, I thought it was a catchy phrase, albeit a terrible point to make as a rejoinder to Kerry. But when he then proceeded to fall so madly in love with it that he began using it every time his cribsheets failed him, it became exhausting.

Kerry won the debate from the get-go. His responses were precise, more spontaneous, had more flow, and sounded intelligent. He also had poise and sophistication in his arguments, made more convincing because of his firm grasp of facts. Kerry had a neat way of wrapping up every single one of his speeches, be they a direct answer or rebuttal. It was a joy to hear his smooth tyransitions. More importantly, they came across as easy, and not slick. Bush, on the other hand, clearly had been coached repeatedly. He lacked poise - the number of times he sounded like a school yard bully is a disgrace to the Presidency. He came across as an abrasive frat boy who had just had his ego punctured. Classic example:

KERRY: Jim, the president just said something extraordinarily revealing and frankly very important in this debate. In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he just said, "The enemy attacked us." Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. al Qaeda attacked us.

BUSH: First of all, of course I know Osama bin Laden attacked us. I know that.

What was that?? The body language that went along with Bush's reply made it mortifyingly obvious that he got flustered by Kerry's well made point, and had taken it as a personal affront that his confusion of who the enemy was was being shown up on national TV. I could not believe at that moment that that bloke has held the Presidency for as long as has. Yet another example of when Bush let his guard down was when he injected the issue of the International Criminal Court from nowhere.

BUSH: Let me -- I'm not exactly sure what you mean, "passes the global test," you take preemptive action if you pass a global test. My attitude is you take preemptive action in order to protect the American people, that you act in order to make this country secure. My opponent talks about me not signing certain treaties. Let me tell you one thing I didn't sign, and I think it shows the difference of our opinion -- the difference of opinions. And that is, I wouldn't join the International Criminal Court. It's a body based in The Hague where unaccountable judges and prosecutors can pull our troops or diplomats up for trial.

It looks a LOT better in text form than it did when he uttered those words on TV. And that's saying a lot.

To give credit where it's due though, Bush did connect with the crowd just that tad bit more. He had the better sense of humour - when asked what he thought of Kerry's character, Bush responded with an off-the-cuff, "That's a loaded question." He then went on to say, "I won't hold it against him that he went to Yale. There's nothing wrong with that. " That showed a sponeity in him that previously hadn't come through. I shudder when I think of those few excruciating moments when Bush tried to induce some emotion in his voice when talking about troops lives being lost in Iraq. Not the kind of glaringly blatant fake grief one expects to see from the President.

Ultimately, Kerry was the better debator. He never once lost his poise, and yet, did not appear at any time like a smooth-operator. I enjoyed watching him debate - it was an intellectually stimulating dance to some kick-ass music with a great partner who knew what he was doing.

Oh, one final point, it was great to see Kerry take notes wile Bush was speaking, and use his self-made notes in his rebuttal speeches. Wonder where Bush gathered his material from.

Lame post

2004-10-01T02:13:00.000-04:00

I have so much material but am kinda sleepy too. But suffice it to say, a punch-in-the-gut post about the job hunt in the legal industry and tonight's Presidential Debate is in the offing. Tomorrow, it'll be up and running.

NO!!!

2004-09-29T16:48:00.000-04:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3700110.stm

YES!!!

2004-09-29T16:47:00.000-04:00

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040929/ts_nm/rights_patriot_dc

2004-09-29T01:26:00.000-04:00

Secured Transactions today was a nightmare. We have this system whereby the class (which's just approx. 25 people strong) is divided into groups and each group is primarily responsible for an assignment for a given class. I was up for today's class, which, on account of my stellar luck, had the Dean and some other professors sit in to evaluate my Prof. As we were going through the Problems, I realised that there was one I had accidentally missed. And of course, Murphy had to prevail, and I got called on for exactly that Problem. I read the relevant statute in a hurry, as I was speaking, and got it all wrong. Horribly wrong. Disgustingly wrong. It was a moment of acute shame that, try as I might, I keep re-visiting in my mind. Not pretty. The Prof was nice enough to then give me a chance to re-read the statute and enunciate its relevance to the problem at hand.

I tried to redeem myself by volunteering a solution to the following prolem, but u know, once the moment's gone, it's gone for good. I'll always be known as the girl who flubbed in front of an audience. Sigh.

And that was the high point of my day.

It's raining heavily here - tropical rains, apparently. By the time I got home from class, my jeans were soaked. I hate the rain! It makes everything so slushy and ...am gonna say it ... wet! As always, my cupboard was empty and I had to look frantically for food. Called a couple of places but, gawd, even Dominos wasn't doing delivery tonight!! Finally 3L had to brave the rain and get Macs. Since I've done my reading for Evidence tomorrow, I'm indulging in some SVU. Some chinese immigrants' problem. Oh, for those of u in S'pore who follow Gilmore Girls, I have the latest scoop on it.... let me know if u get curious and I can supply the dope!

Suunday evening was fun. 3L and I went out to South Street on an impulse and had cheap cheasy thin crust pizzas. Awesome. I love South Street - reminds me of Bugis, sort of. It's one of the more lively places here.. I love the noise and the hustle and bustle that's woefully missing from the rest of this city. Centre City has life, but South Street just has this vibe to it. It contains an assortment of shops/stores, bars, restaurants and whacky pool parlours which I find reminiscent of S'pore's Orchard Road. There are some exotic Indian artifacts stores in there which I plan on checking out soon. Owing to time constraints, I didn't get to spend as much time as I would've liked to on Sunday. But it was energising just being there for that short duration. I was ready to face Monday, and that's all that matters, right?

Do I need to have a title?

2004-09-28T00:24:00.000-04:00

Guess now I do anyway.

Now that that's outta the way, the more meaty parts of this blog. Still getting used to it...blog...Anyway, last week was such a whirl. The week passed in a blur of classes - Business Associations (BA), Tax, Secured Transactions (ST), and Evidence (ugh). Oh yea, there's Business Basics too, a.k.a. Business for Law Students, a.k.a. Business for Dummies. Tuesday is the day I have the good fortune to study the whole lot - 4 classes back to back, finishing off the day on a high note at 6pm, with a 2 hr Biz Basics class. Man, I dread Tuesdays!

But u know, I was just thinking over the weekend (anything to get me off studies), law school's just all-consuming. When I created this blog, I wanted to be different from all the other JDites with blogs. I wanted not to talk about law school, not to talk about lawyer-ly subjects. But heck, look at my pseudonym! Speaking of which, let me digress here, when I came up with it, I thought it was going to be unique. Who was I kidding! Res Ipsa Loquitur is a crescendo! But to get back on track, besides my nom de guerre, I can't think of writing anything that does not have to do with law school. Hence, the "all-consuming". I challenge any JDite to hold a conversation without dragging law into it. Dragging is probably a bad choice of words - weaving is better. I'd be talking to someone about something as inane as clothes or cosmetics, and *boom*, I'd find myself somehow discussing the merits (or the lack thereof) of some tort case or a how that Contracts case involving Form Contracts paves the way for a potential lawsuit against Comcast or Verizon. Geek, me.

But really, even when not discussing substantive law, conversation will meander its way to law school or the legal community at large. It'll find its way to a law professor who was in Vietnam or one who wrote a 91 page article on IT and the UCC's interplay with regards to financing systems. Yea, somehow. I wonder how med students converse... "The cadaver I cut up the other day had dehydrated intestine.", "The dead bloke's insides got goo the colour of mucus." Nah, I probably made it seem more interesting. No offense, med kids.

So over the weekend, as part of my enjoyable Saturday evening reading, I was looking through my Secured Transactions stuff, and discovered something that connected up with Evidence! The rush I felt at being able to connect up some imaginary dots was intense... and scary. The transformation from student to ubergeek was complete. Nonetheless, it was awesome to be able to read a business law course and link it up seamlessly (yup, that's right, am shamelessly complimenting myself AND I know it) to Evidence! Craaaazy. But good crazy. At that moment, I realised more than ever that law school is fun, for me at least. This year has kicked some serious ass thus far, touch wood. I think I'll keep liking it,, at least, I hope I do.

Yet another bites the dust

2004-09-23T00:43:00.000-04:00

And so I've joined the burgeoning community of bloggers. Unfortunately (and probably, ironically), I don't have much to write right now, but the urge to pen down something on this momentous day was irresistible. Ta for now.

Can't believe I'm a blogger...