George Mason=future top 20?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
muddywaters
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:59 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby muddywaters » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:25 am

FTW!

matt.l.b
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:32 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby matt.l.b » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:35 am

DerrickRose wrote:
PubIntLawyer wrote:So...seeing that we've come to the end of the bush admin, would american be a safer bet or do you think gmu will continue to be "bettter?"

Thanks


Put it this way. If you voted for Obama go to American. If you voted for McCain go to GMU.


That's ridiculous and like saying that NYU grads will suffer on Wall Street because of Bernie Madoff. Chicago and Columbia = ties to both Milton Friedman and Barack Obama.

Anyway, the investigative report on the DOJ hiring practices (no one dispute that it was ideological) seems to indicate that graduates weren't favored or deselected because of their school but rather on their ties to the American Federalist Society instead of the American Constitution Society. Similarly, DOJ hires under the Bush administration came from both American and GMU. Evidence here: http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/s0806/final.pdf and, slightly, here http://www.usdoj.gov/oarm/arm/hp/lawschools.htm

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby ruleser » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:37 am

matt.l.b wrote:
DerrickRose wrote:
PubIntLawyer wrote:So...seeing that we've come to the end of the bush admin, would american be a safer bet or do you think gmu will continue to be "bettter?"

Thanks


Put it this way. If you voted for Obama go to American. If you voted for McCain go to GMU.


That's ridiculous and like saying that NYU grads will suffer on Wall Street because of Bernie Madoff.


:roll: Bernie Madoff was just voted President of NYU?

Yes, Bernie Madoff to NYU exactly equals an Obama vote to the state of Washington DC hiring. Or, maybe, -1

matt.l.b
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:32 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby matt.l.b » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:40 am

NYU was the T14 that lost 24 mil by investing in Madoff. You're thinking of Cardozo

Institutional ties and their good sense is the question in dispute. Not individual identities.

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby ruleser » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:42 am

matt.l.b wrote:NYU was the T14 that lost 24 mil by investing in Madoff. You're thinking of Cardozo


No, I was being sarcastic. The relation between Madoff and NYU is in no way similar to what you said it in response to (vote for Obama, go to American, etc.) I was making fun of your metaphor. I suppose I need to slow it down a bit for you. I'm sorry.

Let's start at the beginning. There is more than one school of economics....

matt.l.b
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:32 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby matt.l.b » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:45 am

... and there is more than one type of law student at every school.

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby ruleser » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:47 am

This is like singing a duet, fun...

...yet some schools choose to push a single dogma on the various types of students...

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby dresden doll » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:53 am

I think that anyone going into public interest would be better served by American, but that's just my humble, not-incredibly-well-informed opinion. I know GMU is fairly conservative; thus, given such an image, I have a bit of a hard time imagining it very oriented towards public interest, an area that typically tends to be populated with students from liberal schools like NYU.

Also, I don't think that the link between law and economics is the gist of the story behind GMU's reputed conservatism. I'm a liberal and yet still inherently interested in ties between the two since I happen to consider economy the underpinning of just about any other aspect of society, law included. Moreover, University of Chicago has been practicing just such interdisciplinary approach for many years now and isn't considered nearly quite as conservative as GMU. I think the issue more so lies in the fact that their faculty tends to feverishly preach conservative dogma, which ultimately results in self-selection among prospective students, with conservatives choosing to apply and liberals keeping their distance.

I don't think GMU will continue to rise dramatically, and I don't see it cracking T20 any time soon, at least not soon enough to make substantial difference to the OP. USNWR's methodology doesn't exactly facilitate sharp, rapid rises when it comes to the upper rungs of the rankings ladder.

Disclaimer: I'm likely a little biased because I dislike GMU. I recently read a book review of Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine' written by a GMU professor that made me cringe (poor reasoning likely caused by the ideological tin foil hat being its main drawback). So, if I were you, OP, I wouldn't go there. But that's just me.

User avatar
ruleser
Posts: 870
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:41 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby ruleser » Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:56 am

dresden doll wrote:I think that anyone going into public interest would be better served by American, but that's just my humble, not-incredibly-well-informed opinion. I know GMU is fairly conservative; thus, given such an image, I have a bit of a hard time imagining it very oriented towards public interest, an area that typically tends to be populated with students from liberal schools like NYU.

Also, I don't think that the link between law and economics is the gist of the story behind GMU's reputed conservatism. I'm a liberal and yet still inherently interested in ties between the two since I happen to consider economy the underpinning of just about any other aspect of society, law included. Moreover, University of Chicago has been practicing just such interdisciplinary approach for many years now and isn't considered nearly quite as conservative as GMU. I think the issue more so lies in the fact that their faculty tends to feverishly preach conservative dogma, which ultimately results in self-selection among prospective students, with conservatives choosing to apply and liberals keeping their distance.

I don't think GMU will continue to rise dramatically, and I don't see it cracking T20 any time soon, at least not soon enough to make substantial difference to the OP. USNWR's methodology doesn't exactly facilitate sharp, rapid rises when it comes to the upper rungs of the rankings ladder.

Disclaimer: I'm likely a little biased because I dislike GMU. I recently read a book review of Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine' written by a GMU professor that made me cringe (poor reasoning likely caused by the ideological tin foil hat being its main drawback). So, if I were you, OP, I wouldn't go there. But that's just me.


Well said.

tbx59
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:52 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby tbx59 » Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:14 am

Here-in lies the point: liberalism is etymologically pure to the root: it literally is liberal to views; NEOCONS on the other hand, are dogmatizers and catechizers

chris888777
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 10:49 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby chris888777 » Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:36 am

They'll settle around 30-35.

interestedbyestander
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:44 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby interestedbyestander » Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:50 pm

Georgetown & GW = Top 20.
GMU & American = T30-T40.

Top law firms aim for Top 20 schools.
Government jobs go primarily to lower tier schools. (exception: SCOTUS)

Who cares what the Bush Admin did or who the Obama admin might hire?

User avatar
Dick Whitman
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:55 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby Dick Whitman » Sun Jan 18, 2009 7:11 pm

tbx59 wrote:Here-in lies the point: liberalism is etymologically pure to the root: it literally is liberal to views; NEOCONS on the other hand, are dogmatizers and catechizers


Meh. Pragmatism will trump idealogy (left or right) every time, because it bases decisions upon an honest analysis of facts. An Obama administration that made decisions by consulting DailyKos would be as incompetent and unsuccessful as the Bush presidency. The strongest argument for giving Democrats power is that they are not currently dominated by their far wing, unlike the Republicans.

GMU will find future gains harder to come by. They are getting to a point where they will be competing with schools like Emory that have serious endowments to throw around.

aed9
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:06 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby aed9 » Sun Jan 18, 2009 8:23 pm

For what it's worth, I think that you should take the opinion of your future employers in consideration. The pre-law advisor at my UG discouraged me from applying to GMU, because he said it is not well-regarded at all within the legal community. I took his advice, even though I did have a fee waiver and think I had a good chance at being accepted. That's just my two cents, though.

User avatar
screech
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:46 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby screech » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:10 pm

It's funny...Bush is the skapegoat for all the world's problems, including GMU's predicted fall in the rankings by a liberal. Now that he's gone, can we please start getting real? Last I checked, rankings were not based on the prevailing politics of the day. I also think that GMU and their graduates would be insulted by such a claim. Because, as we all now know, if you disagree with a liberal, you are close minded. Period. Liberals just can't stand it when conservatives are successful. Or when presumeably conservative academic institutions gain credibility. Oh, it must be "Oil for Rankings" under the Bush Administration, because such a school would never go up in rankings on its own. That's impossible.

showNprove
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:52 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby showNprove » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:13 pm

.
Last edited by showNprove on Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Clever username
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:50 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby Clever username » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:20 pm

showNprove wrote:
screech wrote:It's funny...Bush is the skapegoat for all the world's problems, including GMU's predicted fall in the rankings by a liberal. Now that he's gone, can we please start getting real? Last I checked, rankings were not based on the prevailing politics of the day. I also think that GMU and their graduates would be insulted by such a claim. Because, as we all now know, if you disagree with a liberal, you are close minded. Period. Liberals just can't stand it when conservatives are successful. Or when presumeably conservative academic institutions gain credibility. Oh, it must be "Oil for Rankings" under the Bush Administration, because such a school would never go up in rankings on its own. That's impossible.

I blame Bush for your unduly slanted opinion.


I laughed.

cavalierHoo
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:59 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby cavalierHoo » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:25 pm

I've also heard stories about GMU's sour rep with DC area law firms.

But whether it's GMU, American, Maryland, Catholic or Howard ... DC law schools all take a serious backseat to Georgetown and GW. I don't see that ever changing, even if Georgetown should ever drop from the T14 or if GMU possibly moved up in the rankings.

User avatar
Formerbruin
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 2:24 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby Formerbruin » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:44 pm

Liberals just can't stand it when conservatives are successful.


It's not successful conservatives I can't stand. It's conservatives who catastrophically run the economy into the ground that I can't stand. To say nothing of ignoring human rights and chipping away at our freedoms.

interestedbyestander
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:44 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby interestedbyestander » Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:49 pm

Formerbruin wrote:
Liberals just can't stand it when conservatives are successful.


It's not successful conservatives I can't stand. It's conservatives who catastrophically run the economy into the ground that I can't stand. To say nothing of ignoring human rights and chipping away at our freedoms.


This may all be true but their revisionist history will make things all better again! :roll:

helvidius2010
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:33 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby helvidius2010 » Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:00 pm

Formerbruin wrote:It's not successful conservatives I can't stand. It's conservatives who catastrophically run the economy into the ground that I can't stand. To say nothing of ignoring human rights and chipping away at our freedoms.


Republicans contributed to downfall of the economy after they took office and stopped being fiscally conservative. So can we stop using the terms Republican and conservative as if they are still interchangeable?

PubIntLawyer
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:53 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby PubIntLawyer » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:36 pm

Does American have a better rep with dc government/firms etc than gmu?

Action Jackson
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:46 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby Action Jackson » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:59 pm

screech wrote:It's funny...Bush is the skapegoat for all the world's problems, including GMU's predicted fall in the rankings by a liberal. Now that he's gone, can we please start getting real? Last I checked, rankings were not based on the prevailing politics of the day. I also think that GMU and their graduates would be insulted by such a claim. Because, as we all now know, if you disagree with a liberal, you are close minded. Period. Liberals just can't stand it when conservatives are successful. Or when presumeably conservative academic institutions gain credibility. Oh, it must be "Oil for Rankings" under the Bush Administration, because such a school would never go up in rankings on its own. That's impossible.


What's funny is that you (and others) try to wave this off as spooky liberal voodoo, when in fact several people here have spelled out quite plainly WHY the Bush administration's illegal hiring practices would benefit a school like GMU.

What's more, it needs to be clear the problem isn't with conservatives, Republicans, or conservativism, per se, but rather with the incredibly corrupt assholes in the Bush administration, who happen to be conservative Republicans. Unethical and illegal hiring practices aren't so much an ideological problem, but rather a problem stemming from how totally fucked up Bush and his minions are.

It would also help to pull your head out of you ass and see the Bush administration for the jackasses they are. Or maybe you think illegal hiring practices and then lying to Congress about it is A-OK for the Justice Dept.

User avatar
HipHopAPotamus
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:37 am

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby HipHopAPotamus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:06 am

GMU had an amazing run in the 06 tourney, but thinking that a team that plays in the Colonial Athletic Association can get ranked in the top 20 is a bit of a stretch...

User avatar
jewtangclan03
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:08 pm

Re: George Mason=future top 20?

Postby jewtangclan03 » Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:16 am

HipHopAPotamus wrote:GMU had an amazing run in the 06 tourney, but thinking that a team that plays in the Colonial Athletic Association can get ranked in the top 20 is a bit of a stretch...


True, but have you seen VCU play? They're legit, and capable of making a run into the Sweet 16.

And if the conspiracy theorists could take a break that'd be great. Thanks.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest