what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
TheFactor
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby TheFactor » Tue May 03, 2011 2:10 pm

Capitol A wrote:Wasn't my quote, so i don't know what the OW Holmes thing was about either.
Challenges in bold.
RE: factual inaccuracies, I'm not sure which statements you believe to be inaccurate, but even if there are inaccuracies, that doesn't make the entire post worthless. Nor does it completely negate the fact that there are some solid points present.

I mean did you read his post? He is trying to argue that someone who was the editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review, taught Constitutional Law at Chicago, and oh-by-the-way is the first black president in U.S. history, is not smart (or "brilliant"). If you can't see how silly of an argument that is, I don't know what to tell you.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 2:21 pm

vamedic03 wrote:
Ignatius Reilly wrote:Love how this thread derailed.

For all of you think Obama is brilliant, may I ask what exactly indicates his brilliance?

He's a good speaker, but he is not a great speaker and most of his speeches lack the substance of the great orators and are full of straw men. I don't think he was ever published in the law review, and his two books aren't exactly masterpieces. Being president never qualified anyone as smart. He was accepted at harvard, but law school admissions were not as competitive as they are now, plus he is a minority canidate, with a very interesting background. Magna Cum Laude may make you a smart person, but not brilliant. His legacy will be that he was the first black president and a shitty president....he is no Oliver Wendall Holmes.


How about this - after you manage to get onto a top 10 Law Review and then manage to get onto the managing board, let alone become the editor in chief, of said Law Review, then you can come back and discuss the President's intelligence.

To be clear, I never argued that Obama was not brilliant, but we all know that this rebuttle is worthless. This is like saying that because I am so damn ugly (which I am), I am incapable of making a judgement of whether Jessica Simpson still looks hot (she hasn't since right before that awful Dukes of Hazard movie).
I don't need to posess a particular quality in order to recognize whether or not that quality exists in others.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 2:23 pm

bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby kwais » Tue May 03, 2011 2:32 pm

Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.


So you give Bush credit for this one. Let me guess, the financial crisis was all Obama, no Bush right? You are going to believe what you want. I'm sure Obama could fulfill all your wildest dreams and you would find a way to hate him

kublaikahn
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:47 am

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby kublaikahn » Tue May 03, 2011 3:07 pm

.
Last edited by kublaikahn on Sun May 15, 2011 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bport hopeful
Posts: 4913
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2010 4:09 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby bport hopeful » Tue May 03, 2011 3:10 pm

Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.

Typical.

User avatar
rinkrat19
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:35 am

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby rinkrat19 » Tue May 03, 2011 3:17 pm

Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.


I read that the info was NOT gleaned during waterboarding the dude (and he was waterboarded), but later on, during further "traditional" interrogation techniques. If true, torture FTL.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 3:26 pm

kwais wrote:
Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.


So you give Bush credit for this one. Let me guess, the financial crisis was all Obama, no Bush right? You are going to believe what you want. I'm sure Obama could fulfill all your wildest dreams and you would find a way to hate him

i didn't say give Bush credit. i actually really respect the fact that Obama apparently gave the order to go in and get bin laden rather than just bombing the building. in no way did i say or even imply that Obama deserves no credit for the killing of bin laden. What i said is that it's hard to really know if this is a 180 for him and his legacy. it appears that he did a good job with the hunt for bin laden, but in order to do so he absolutely defied the things he said while campaining.
i certainly don't blame Obama for the financial crisis, but by bringing that up you further my point. the financial crisis is something that Obama inherited, just like the pursuit of bin laden. we can judge him on the way he is handling what he inherited.
As far as finding a way to hate Obama...I never ever even came close to saying or implying that I "hate" President Obama. For one thing he is the President of the United States, and I would not say that I hate the POTUS, but beside that, all I did was question whether this is a true 180 for Obama and his popularity/bid for 2012. It is entirely possible for me to be his #1 fan and still bring up this question.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 3:27 pm

bport hopeful wrote:
Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.

Typical.

of what?

TheFactor
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby TheFactor » Tue May 03, 2011 3:28 pm

kublaikahn wrote:
TheFactor wrote:
Capitol A wrote:Wasn't my quote, so i don't know what the OW Holmes thing was about either.
Challenges in bold.
RE: factual inaccuracies, I'm not sure which statements you believe to be inaccurate, but even if there are inaccuracies, that doesn't make the entire post worthless. Nor does it completely negate the fact that there are some solid points present.

I mean did you read his post? He is trying to argue that someone who was the editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review, taught Constitutional Law at Chicago, and oh-by-the-way is the first black president in U.S. history, is not smart (or "brilliant"). If you can't see how silly of an argument that is, I don't know what to tell you.


Are smart and brilliant the same thing? Also are you smarter if you teach con law at chicago instead of say UIUC? Being elected to positions on journals and public office makes you brilliant? Does this mean GW Bush was brilliant?

I think there is a difference between a guy who got a job as a cancer researcher and the guy who developed a cure. It is not the title you hold, but your production that defines you. We know of Obama's titles, let's see the production.

No, smart and brilliant are probably not the same thing, but that's just an irrelevant semantics debate. Being elected as EIC of the Harvard Law Review does not "make you brilliant" - it is a result of being brilliant (or smart...whatever).

As far as Obama's production...You may not like what he's done while in office, but he's had one of the most legislatively productive two years in modern presidential history. I agree that there is a difference between a cancer researcher and the guy who developed a cancer cure, but that doesn't mean the run-of-the-mill cancer researcher isn't brilliant....just means he isn't the most brilliant...assuming (hypothetically, of course) that finding a cure for cancer is the result of a certain level of brilliance.

Like someone mentioned previously, Obama went from losing a House race to POTUS in less than ten years. He may not be the smartest guy in the world, but an accomplishment like that (his previous academic accomplishments notwithstanding) indicates a certain level of some type of brilliance.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 3:30 pm

rinkrat19 wrote:
Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.


I read that the info was NOT gleaned during waterboarding the dude (and he was waterboarded), but later on, during further "traditional" interrogation techniques. If true, torture FTL.

hmmm....I heard that much of the information was gathered during "enhanced" interrogation. I don't know whether "enhanced" refers specifically to waterboarding or not. The other thing is that, while much of this info was gathered by operatives in eastern europe, at least some came from detainees at GITMO, which was promised to be closed.
The real fact of the matter is that we will never know the whole truth, and we probably don't need to. As far as I'm concerned, the ends justify the means.

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 3:39 pm

No, smart and brilliant are probably not the same thing, but that's just an irrelevant semantics debate. Being elected as EIC of the Harvard Law Review does not "make you brilliant" - it is a result of being brilliant (or smart...whatever).

As far as Obama's production...You may not like what he's done while in office, but he's had one of the most legislatively productive two years in modern presidential history. I agree that there is a difference between a cancer researcher and the guy who developed a cancer cure, but that doesn't mean the run-of-the-mill cancer researcher isn't brilliant....just means he isn't the most brilliant...assuming (hypothetically, of course) that finding a cure for cancer is the result of a certain level of brilliance.

Like someone mentioned previously, Obama went from losing a House race to POTUS in less than ten years. He may not be the smartest guy in the world, but an accomplishment like that (his previous academic accomplishments notwithstanding) indicates a certain level of some type of brilliance.


While i may not agree with a lot of what you have said previously ITT, this is totally credited.
Again, (and obviously NONE of this has anything to do with LSAT scores at the t14) while there may not be a difference between smart and brilliant, there is a tremendous difference between smart and good president, and a tremendous difference between smart and agrees with my view of the way this country ought to be run.

User avatar
rinkrat19
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:35 am

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby rinkrat19 » Tue May 03, 2011 3:57 pm

Capitol A wrote:
rinkrat19 wrote:
Capitol A wrote:
bport hopeful wrote:Obama kille Bin Laden = Auto 180

hard to know if this is true or not. the intelligence used to track OBL down was gained using Bush era 'interview' techniques that Obama renounced.


I read that the info was NOT gleaned during waterboarding the dude (and he was waterboarded), but later on, during further "traditional" interrogation techniques. If true, torture FTL.

hmmm....I heard that much of the information was gathered during "enhanced" interrogation. I don't know whether "enhanced" refers specifically to waterboarding or not. The other thing is that, while much of this info was gathered by operatives in eastern europe, at least some came from detainees at GITMO, which was promised to be closed.
The real fact of the matter is that we will never know the whole truth, and we probably don't need to. As far as I'm concerned, the ends justify the means.


I had to go find where I read it. Take it for what you will:

Mohammed (Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, 9/11 mastermind) did not reveal the names (of Bin Laden's super-secret couriers) while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_ ... zc2V0A2FwL

Even Rumsfeld (if you want to believe his definition of "not harsh", or anything on Newsmax.com) said:
"It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding."
--LinkRemoved--

Capitol A
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby Capitol A » Tue May 03, 2011 4:08 pm

I had to go find where I read it. Take it for what you will:

Mohammed (Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, 9/11 mastermind) did not reveal the names (of Bin Laden's super-secret couriers) while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_ ... zc2V0A2FwL

Even Rumsfeld (if you want to believe his definition of "not harsh", or anything on Newsmax.com) said:
"It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding."
--LinkRemoved-- ... /id/394820




There are certainly agendas at play when reporting these things. Like I said, we will never know the whole truth. If we believe Rummy, then the info did come from GITMO. Which, as I mentioned earlier was also promised to have been closed.
None of what I'm saying is meant to take away from the fact that bin laden is dead and that a lot of hard work from both administrations, and more importantly the military and intelligence communities went into it. I was making the point that this may not be an auto 180, instead it has the possibility of further bringing to light the struggles that the President has been having with keeping his campain promises.

kublaikahn
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:47 am

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby kublaikahn » Tue May 03, 2011 4:26 pm

.
Last edited by kublaikahn on Sun May 15, 2011 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

czelede
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby czelede » Tue May 03, 2011 4:34 pm

kublaikahn wrote:
TheFactor wrote:No, smart and brilliant are probably not the same thing, but that's just an irrelevant semantics debate. Being elected as EIC of the Harvard Law Review does not "make you brilliant" - it is a result of being brilliant (or smart...whatever).

As far as Obama's production...You may not like what he's done while in office, but he's had one of the most legislatively productive two years in modern presidential history. I agree that there is a difference between a cancer researcher and the guy who developed a cancer cure, but that doesn't mean the run-of-the-mill cancer researcher isn't brilliant....just means he isn't the most brilliant...assuming (hypothetically, of course) that finding a cure for cancer is the result of a certain level of brilliance.

Like someone mentioned previously, Obama went from losing a House race to POTUS in less than ten years. He may not be the smartest guy in the world, but an accomplishment like that (his previous academic accomplishments notwithstanding) indicates a certain level of some type of brilliance.


It is not irrelevant at all. It is all important. BO supporters hold him up as some sort of transcendental figure, brilliant beyond measure. BO's evidence is titles and elections, but never his actual WORK PRODUCT (unless you count passing unfavorable, legislation by circumventing house rules and with a super majority in both chambers). As my daughters third grade teacher wisely said, 'There is a difference between bright and brilliant."

And right, going from worst to first is a measure of brilliance. GWB going from losing a house race, being an alcoholic underchiever, and going bankrupt in business to the WH (and also passing historical legislation)--brilliant right?


I don't think GWB is the best example here, considering he comes from a family of extremely wealthy and well connected politicians...one of which WAS in the WH. He went to a Phillips academy and his family bought him a place at Yale. And I don't really know what you mean with the qualifier "historical" since in some way, every piece of legislation is historical I guess. But he never left a child behind :)

Brilliance for me is more in the realm of Clinton (who I guess also went from very humble beginnings to accomplish a great lot). However, in my opinion "going from worst to first" has nothing to do with brilliance anyhow.

Edit: This thread needs to DIE

And also:
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Last edited by czelede on Tue May 03, 2011 8:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TheFactor
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby TheFactor » Tue May 03, 2011 4:51 pm

kublaikahn wrote:
TheFactor wrote:No, smart and brilliant are probably not the same thing, but that's just an irrelevant semantics debate. Being elected as EIC of the Harvard Law Review does not "make you brilliant" - it is a result of being brilliant (or smart...whatever).

As far as Obama's production...You may not like what he's done while in office, but he's had one of the most legislatively productive two years in modern presidential history. I agree that there is a difference between a cancer researcher and the guy who developed a cancer cure, but that doesn't mean the run-of-the-mill cancer researcher isn't brilliant....just means he isn't the most brilliant...assuming (hypothetically, of course) that finding a cure for cancer is the result of a certain level of brilliance.

Like someone mentioned previously, Obama went from losing a House race to POTUS in less than ten years. He may not be the smartest guy in the world, but an accomplishment like that (his previous academic accomplishments notwithstanding) indicates a certain level of some type of brilliance.


It is not irrelevant at all. It is all important. BO supporters hold him up as some sort of transcendental figure, brilliant beyond measure. BO's evidence is titles and elections, but never his actual WORK PRODUCT (unless you count passing unfavorable, legislation by circumventing house rules and with a super majority in both chambers). As my daughters third grade teacher wisely said, 'There is a difference between bright and brilliant."

And right, going from worst to first is a measure of brilliance. GWB going from losing a house race, being an alcoholic underchiever, and going bankrupt in business to the WH (and also passing historical legislation)--brilliant right?

Obama's titles and elections are the result of work products lol. He was EIC of the Harvard Law Review because of the quality of this work. He is POTUS because the American people supported his agenda over that of this opponent (i.e. they liked his product). The fact that you disagree with the things that he has accomplished doesn't make him any less brilliant. You'd be hard pressed, for example, to find any rational person who agrees with the actions of Adolf Hitler. But it would also be equally difficult to find any intelligent person who wouldn't admit to Hitler's brilliance. Evaluation of brilliance requires a bit of objectivity.

Comparing Obama to Bush is useless. Bush is a member of arguably the most powerful family in American history. Your comparison assumes that each man's path to the presidency was similar and equally difficult. The fact that Obama's ascension to the presidency was brilliant doesn't mean that becoming president requires brilliance.

bigben
Posts: 703
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby bigben » Tue May 03, 2011 4:53 pm

jmhendri wrote:ok..... because the average Havard LSAT score is 171.... Obama's score can be estimated to be 171? WOW.

That logic is flawed even before you consider the fact that he is an URM with an interesting back story and the writing ability to truss it up so that it's even more interesting.

The whole point of that blog post was to point out that this logic is wrong. Pretty funny that the other guy wrote a long post that completely misses this point.

bigben
Posts: 703
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby bigben » Tue May 03, 2011 4:58 pm

OnlyLivingBoyinNY wrote:
Due to affirmative action, however, one must reduce that score by at least 186 points.


Some minorities admitted to Harvard have less than average LSAT scores. Barack Obama is a minority (sort of), and Barack Obama was admitted to Harvard. Therefore, Barack Obama's LSAT score is less than average.

Am I following this blog's logic correctly?

I think they are talking in terms of what is likely, rather than what is absolutely true. At any rate, it's a dumb discussion all around. Maybe Obama had a perfect score, and maybe he had a fairly low one given lower admissions standards at the time and affirmative action. We don't know and it doesn't really matter anyway.

kublaikahn
Posts: 647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:47 am

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby kublaikahn » Tue May 03, 2011 5:42 pm

.
Last edited by kublaikahn on Sun May 15, 2011 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TheFactor
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby TheFactor » Tue May 03, 2011 6:46 pm

kublaikahn wrote:When you add "LOL" to a statement, does it give it more credibility? Like, oh, that is so obvious.

Um, yes. The fact that recognition in the form of titles/elections is the result of some type of work product should be obvious.

Not sure how not ending DADT soon enough is somehow a measure of his intelligence, but whatever...I'm not going to feed the troll anymore.

dkt4
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: what is the lowest lsat score ever to be accepted to a T-14?

Postby dkt4 » Tue May 03, 2011 9:29 pm

kublaikahn wrote:I would have made a speech in the first week about serving in combat and how I'd do it again because the feeling you get when you disembark to be greeted by your loved ones makes it all worthwhile. And how, my gay brothers (and sisters) are denied that after risking their lives to defend mine. Oh wait, BO was cleaning graffiti off walls instead. Well, he is a genius so I am sure he could have made it work.


this is a good way to be an elected official. GG dude.




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest