Aaron has an excellent post at The Stopped Clock about Ann Althouse’s rant about how law professors nowadays (do I even need to go on?).

It was a long time ago, but I don’t remember ever being told we were going to learn to “think like a lawyer”. It was sort of assumed, perhaps because we knew that if we wanted to “think like a law professor”, we should have gotten into the University of Michigan; since we didn’t, we were by-god going to have to learn to practice law. There were really only two incidents that made it clear how our skull innards were going to be rearranged:

1) One of the traditional methods of education in law school is to start off reading old cases, some of which are ‘foundational’ but many of which are obsolete, to illustrate the development of the law. That’s the ostensible reason, anyway; the real reason, I am convinced, is to get you over the notion that the legally correct result is the “right” one. So you spend a lot of time reading cases about widows being kicked out of their homes, people whose children were injured by products being told that there is no “privity” between the manufacturer and the kid, etcetera.

Early on in Contracts, taught by the impeccably correct Professor Dolan, one of my classmates couldn’t take any more legally-correct injustice and called out “But this is just a game of semantics!” Professor Dolan stopped in mid-Socratic inquiry, ran to the blackboard, seized a piece of chalk and wrote A GAME OF SEMANTICS in foot-high letters.

“Son,” he said, pointing to the blackboard, “welcome to the law.”

2) I was lucky enough to have Civil Procedure taught by a GM products-liability litigator, who was taking a sabbatical because he had just become a father. Civ Pro is generally not what you’d think of as the most exciting subject, and I can’t say Professor Mann actually made it exciting, but he made it important with his very first lecture: “You may think of civil procedure as dull, but let me tell you something: Even if you are not the best lawyer, or you don’t have good facts or the law on your side, if you thoroughly understand civil procedure, you can run rings around your opponent.” It’s a lesson I never forgot, and one I put into practice, to great advantage, every single day.

 

Librarians are generally the first line of defense against censorious idiots, but apparently they’re letting just anybody learn the Dewey Decimal System these days: there is outrage over a Newberry-award-winning book in which the main character overhears another character tell the story of his dog being bitten by a rattlesnake…in the scrotum.

Yes. There is outrage over use of the S Word.

The book has already been banned from school libraries in a handful of states in the South, the West and the Northeast, and librarians in other schools have indicated in the online debate that they may well follow suit. Indeed, the topic has dominated the discussion among librarians since the book was shipped to schools.

Full story of “let’s all fulfill the stereotype of librarians as pinched, glasses-wearing, dried-up old harridans” at the NYT. But the true jaw-dropping moment of idiocy comes from Dana Nilsson, a librarian in Durango, Colorado:

Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her stance. “I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”

You won’t find men’s genitalia in this book either, dumbass: the scrotum in question belongs to a dog.

 

Teresa Nielsen-Hayden has a most excellent proposal for bringing God back into the schools, after following the usual protocols….

Court of Cthulhu

 Comments Off
Feb 042007
 

Kevin Thompson hosts the Illuminati edition of this week’s Blawg Review.

© 2012 mythago Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha