Using the Justice Department’s asinine applicant-screening terms, I’ve just done a quick vanity search on LexisNexis. As it turns out, I could get a job at the DoJ. That means I’m not trying hard enough.
Comments are closed.
Open source, procurement, and gov tech.
Using the Justice Department’s asinine applicant-screening terms, I’ve just done a quick vanity search on LexisNexis. As it turns out, I could get a job at the DoJ. That means I’m not trying hard enough.
Comments are closed.
I got two hits. Woohoo!
I imagine you also have to hold a law degree from a non-accredited university run by Pat Robertson to really be considered “qualified.”
But I’d like to believe she’d hire you because she’d think you’re a stud.
Sam, that criticism of Regent is weak. Yes, overall it is a lower-tier school due its low admission requirements. That said, many very bright people attend there because it is the best alternative considering their particular circumstances. For example, I was accepted by UVA law, but attended U of R instead because Henrico’s public schools are the best in the state, and I preferred that for my kids over Albemarle or Charlottesville. So FYI, those prejudices are often unfounded.
Besides, I know people who graduated from W&L and UVA law who haven’t passed the Virginia bar exam after multiple tries. I’ll take a Regent grad who passes on the first go-round over a UVA grad who has to move out of state in order to practice law (and there are many, many such attorneys).
How is saying that Regent is “a non-accredited university run by Pat Robertson” weak criticism? Seems factual, no?
Is Regent, in fact, accredited (asking – I don’t know and I don’t even know who provides such accreditation)? Is it, in fact, not run by Pat Robertson?
I.P., I would say your comments are slightly more critical than Sam’s. Sam may have thought it, but you said it.
Hrm. Sigh. Not entirely sure how to say this. I have met and worked with Regent grads who are perfectly competent lawyers. And I have met and worked with Regent grads who were . . . not. As someone who attended a fourth tier public university (Georgia State) and a rock solid law school that nonetheless has its own inferiority complex (“You went to Georgetown?” pause “No, George Washignton.”), I’m not really one for casting wide with the school judgments. But sometimes? It’s not unreasonable to do so.
~
In any event, I seriously hope that Goodling and Sampson pay dearly for this. The DOJ had, for years, an extraordinary pool of talent to pull from, and as a result, has some of the smartest and most competent lawyers I’ve ever come across. This Administration has seriously screwed with that pool for years now, and we’ll all suffer for it in the long run.
Regent is in fact an accredited university — I can see why stating otherwise might be construed as weak criticism.
People can leap to the defense of Regent University all they’d like, but the facts of the matter at hand–that Monica Goodling was unlawfully hiring and promoting some candidates in career positions at the DOJ ahead of other candidates who in many instances were more-qualified as a result of real or imagined political leanings–is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that more than 150 Regent law graduates (a school with approx. 500 students) have gone to work in such positions since 2001, when this whole fiasco started, and that this figure represents a dramatic uptick.
Much like my statement that Waldo is a stud, there is factual basis for my statement that he would have a better shot at getting hired in the Justice Department if he’d gone to Regent University.
Community college law schools aside, this is an ethics question and the very public Regent grads we have met lately…fail with honors.
And you can give me all the hell you want for saying it, but folks like Goodling are not exceptionally bright, they are followers who will say or do most anything to be considered a team player…which is the most important criteria for being a ‘tool’ in the Bush toolbox.
Good to see you back IPub. I do notice you picking the low hanging fruit of Goodling and leaving the choice Bush budget lies post standing all alone.
I think we can all agree that, rightly or wrongly, Regent University has a reputation as a lightweight law school that produces unprepared lawyers, and that, without question, the Bush administration strongly favors Regent graduates over graduates of other law schools. Also, that I am (apparently) a stud. ;)
For at least 25 years the Republican Party has been telling people that government doesn’t work. Why should it surprise anyone that this most cynical and corrupt of all modern Republican administrations would implement the systematic dismantling of the DOJ? They get to stand back and say, “see it really doesn’t work”. This is planned destruction.
I have met and worked with (INSERT LAW SCHOOL) grads who are perfectly competent lawyers. And I have met and worked with (INSERT LAW SCHOOL) grads who were . . . not.
You can plug every law school in Virginia into that statement, and it will ring true for every attorney you care to ask.
FWIW, Regent law became accredited relatively recently, so there are quite a few practicing attorneys (of the both the competent and incompetent variety) who graduated before it earned that status.
Sure you could. But if you surveyed those statements as made in a law firm over the course of a year, I bet I could predict the resulting frequency for the value of (INSERT LAW SCHOOL).