Non-Sequiturs: 01.04.07
* Hot lawyers make more money. And we needed a study to tell us this? [Legal Blog Watch via ABA Journal; WSJ Law Blog]
* A truly insane murder case. And yes, Debra Opri -- who has represented Michael Jackson and Larry Birkhead, among other boldface names -- is on the scene. [DealBreaker; HedgeFund.net]
* Ann Althouse wonders: "We've already seen every possible permutation of Hillary, haven't we?" (And this is why we adore HRC -- she's the Madonna of modern American politics, constantly reinventing herself.) [Althouse]
* When it comes to law firm partnership, breaking up is hard to do. Especially when criminal charges are involved. [National Law Journal via Blogonaut]














Comments
Do Obama's supporters really think that he won't completely implode within the first ten days on the job? I mean, I know the guy is a fresh face and a talented speaker and probably also quite intelligent. But what has he ever done that demonstrates he is capable of governing, like being the head of a private equity fund or governor of a state? Even his legislative experience is pretty lacking.
I'm willing to vote for Obama -- but I'm going to have to be convinced that he's more than just big talk.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 04:51 PM
No one adores HRC. No one. Not even her closest supporters. She is finished.
Posted by: Sorry Lat | January 4, 2008 04:59 PM
Obama is this century's Jimmy Carter. You can thank him and his idiot supporters when Jeb Bush wipes the floor with him in 2012.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 05:08 PM
Really I think that any of the three major Democratic candidates have the serious potential of royally screwing up their first 2 years in office and giving the Republicans a landslide victory in the 2010 elections in the Senate and House, and then another landslide in 2012 back into the White House.
The only Republicans that have much chance of actually winning the general election in 2008 are Guiliani and McCain, both of which are really Democrats when you get down to their actual views on the issues. I think Democrats might be much better off in the long run throwing their support to either of them than backing the lame ducks running for the Democratic nomination.
Posted by: Republican | January 4, 2008 05:17 PM
If hot lawyers are more successful, why are nearly all the associates and partners at my V10 firm (reputed to be a firm for *cool* kids) average to dumpy? Also, whatever happened to hot secretaries and paralegal? I haven't seen one at any of the firms in my city (also reputed to be a city for hotties).
Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 05:48 PM
I've been doing supersets on every third workout, and I've achieved huge gains in my upper arms over the last two months.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 06:40 PM
The story doesn't say you have to be hot, only more attractive than your graduating law school class. Maybe lawyers are so far below the social average that these studies only measure discrimination against fuglies and not any meaningful increased upward mobility for hotties.
Posted by: Study flaw | January 4, 2008 06:58 PM
Lat, when are you going to report on layoffs/stealth layoffs?
Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 08:37 PM
6:40,
You should add sustanon 250 to your usual deca cycles. Your base will go to $190k in weeks.
Posted by: Ahnold is Numero Uno | January 5, 2008 02:20 PM
"Really I think that any of the three major Democratic candidates have the serious potential of royally screwing up their first 2 years in office and giving the Republicans a landslide victory in the 2010 elections in the Senate and House, and then another landslide in 2012 back into the White House."
This is why we may be better off letting the Democrats win if the Republican candidate is Giuliani (social liberal), Huckabee (fiscal liberal) or maybe also McCain (not really conservative). All three would do serious harm to the Republican coalition long-term.
I disagree with you about Romney's lack of electability. If you look at rasmussenreports (polling agency with best record), he would win at least against Clinton. I also think that Huckabee would win against any Democrat, regardless of what the poll says, since he would be much better known at the time of the election than he is now. I don't want Huckabee to win the primary, though part of me thinks that it would be hilarious to see the liberals and Europeans freaking out at the prospect of a President who rejects evolution.
Posted by: Fed Soc | January 5, 2008 02:59 PM
Fed Soc and the other dude:
You are both dreaming. You are considering one of myriad possible scenarios as somehow more likely - for no apparent reason other than your desire. 2012? You cannot POSSIBLY be credible on any political prediction that far away, especially not when you are some partisan amateur with more confidence that good sense.
Posted by: Conservative | January 5, 2008 03:52 PM
I heard one of the girls from 2 girls 1 cup is summering at Skadden.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 5, 2008 06:29 PM
Since when did failing at a presidency preclude you from a second term?
Posted by: PRAISE JEEBUS | January 6, 2008 02:16 AM
If you believe that W has handled the job, it seems pretty hard to claim that Obama will not be able to handle the job.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 6, 2008 10:55 AM
NY Times on falling prestige of law and medicine
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/fashion/06professions.html?ex=1200286800&en=aa4d07402579bfe5&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Posted by: Anonymous | January 6, 2008 05:31 PM