Monday, September 15, 2008

THE link.

so i did some web surfing, and it appears that in past years, the bar results were posted at this link (click on the box that reads 'your fate')

from what i can tell, it's a soooooooooper secret mystery exactly when and where the link gets posted. the site i found implies that the results are always posted at this link:

that link is:, although i've seen it varied at:

i make no guarantees.

prior release dates are linked to their respective sources:

July 2004: October 1
February 2006: April 1
July 2006: October 1 (personal source)
February 2007: April 5
July 2007: October 1 (as of 12:10 AM CST, they were up)
February 2008: April 5

I'll update this as I get more info...

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Dear Illinois Bar Association: Please for the love of Christ let me pass

Well it's that time again. My sources tell me I've about 16 days (16 days, 15 hours, 57 minutes) until the Illinois Bar Association will quietly post the bar results on their website. I shouldn't be telling you this. It's a secret. I'm not sure why it's a secret, perhaps because if too many people click on the link at a certain time (date, hour, minute), then the site will crash and we'll all fail.

Superstition is a dangerous thing. I wore yellow plastic beads for 94 hours straight-- I would know.

Anyway, as I was rambling: last night I had the reoccurring my-god-i-can't-sleep-what-if-i-fail episode. I write 'episode' because it wasn't a dream, but not quite consciousness either. Somewhere in between, I guess, where my subconscious is arguing with my emotional health. Who the fuck cares what it was-- it sucked. And it was weirdly familiar. The last 3 weeks of the month of July were riddled with these episodes, and so now I am left to wonder if they'll continue until Ibaby drops the bomb.

I have my excuses... and they're pretty good. My entire family (I'm Catholic, there's a lot of us) invaded my study site in the first week of July while my mother underwent spinal fusion surgery. Yeah, that was pretty distracting. Oh-- and at 2 weeks prior my study partner became a paranoid manic who moved in and out with me twice before accusing me of sleeping with her exboyfriend-- not to mention the countless hours of property MBE question practice I lost while playing psycho-therapist.

And... well I'm sure I have another excuse. I'll think of it and get back to you. Right now, however, I'm going to hope that I won't need to cite any further excuses because I'll have passed.

Please for the love of Christ let me pass...

Friday, August 29, 2008

Gov. Palin in a Nutshell

I'll add cites to this tomorrow:

Gov. Palin is an evangelical christian (read: doesn't believe in evolution), has never been to Washington, has been a governor for only 2 years and who recently described herself as "just an average hockey mom."

Palin is purported to help McCain because she's weaker on environmental protection than he is (which evidently appeases the republican party?!?!?!?!). In fact, she has *strongly* advocated drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Ralph Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition, said of Palin “It is almost impossible to exaggerate how important that is to the conservative faith community.”

Palin holds a lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association, is a former Miss Alaska pageant contestant, advocated an Alaska death penalty law, and believes marriage is "between a man and a woman."

McCain described her as the candidate who would best “best help me shake up Washington.’’

Other than the fact that Palin has a vagina, I don't see anything about her that could make anything in Washington any different than it already is.

Yes, I supported Hillary Clinton to the end and yes, part of the reason I did it was because she's a woman. But Palin ain't much of a sister as far as I'm concerned, so she'll be going it without any support from me.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Dear Loyal Readers, This Is Why You Love Me.

I am the queen of finding good clothes for about a fraction of what everyone else paid. I've lived in four major cities and I've always been broke. Thus, I know where to shop. Let's start with Minneapolis because while it's not the greatest place I've inhabited, its shopping venue takes the cake.

Opitz is the name of the game. It's in Minneapolis (Neighborhood called 'Saint Louis Park' right next to Lake Calhoun). Opitz consists of 2 buildings. Building 1 is large, concrete & and has tacky murals painted on the outside. Building 1 sort of like a TJ Maxx except everything is ridonkulously high-end. It's nice and fun but not *that* cheap.

Building 2 (also called 'The Annex') is next door. It's a tragic little shack which could easily be mistaken for a crack house. The inside is no prettier; it features a whopping 500 square feet of narrow isles, broken garment racks, makeshift dressing rooms and an angry elderly woman who barrel through the store at least twice daily, growling at shoppers in German (and no, she's not an employee-- just a loyal shopper). The Annex's most persuasive deterrent, however, are the giant, electric yellow banners decorating the exterior. These banners are especially fun during summer sidewalk sales when rush hour passerbys drive past the Annex and read 'EVERYTHING TEN DOLLARS!!,' as if to point a big arrow at me, proclaiming 'THIS GIRL IS UNEMPLOYED, COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY BROKE, AND HAS SIX FIGURES IN LAW SCHOOL DEBT.'

So, have I convinced you yet? If not, read on, oh noble bargain finder. 'Cause if great clothes on sale were easy to find, everybody would be doing it. Ready? Ok.

IT'S WORTH IT. When discussing the sale garments I've found at the Annex, my palms sweat, pulse quickens and my pupils dilate. So I'm just gonna spit it out here. Forgive me for my grammatical crimes. Moschino, Prada Collection, Donna Karan Signature, Gianfranco Ferre, Alberta Ferretti, Diane Von Furstenburg, Max Azria Collection, Chloe, Yves Saint Laurent, Oscar De La Renta, Louboutin, Miu Miu, Manolo Blahnik, Jimmy Choo, Chanel, Baleniaga, Monique L'Huillier, Strenesse Gabriele Strehle, Agnona Italy, Pier Antonio Gaspari, Armani Collezioni, Versace. You'll find rare upscale eclectic boutique designers. You'll recognize dresses from a 2006 Vogue. You'll be light-headed with glee. Yes, they are damaged and usually they're only 90% off. HOWEVER, once/month they have the $10 sale, where everything in the store is, you guessed it-- $10. Women stand in line for about an hour beforehand and claw each other down to get inside.

So, moral of the story:

  1. Call ahead and find out when the $10 sale is (will be on a Wednesday, store opens at noon, usually).
  2. Or better yet, sign up for their mailing list (click here do that).
  3. Then call ahead and confirm the date of the $10 sale (click here for their website and contact info.
  4. Go during the summer when the sidewalks are full of extra merchandise included in the $10 sale. (not that you want to go to Minnie during the winter, anyway).
  5. Bring your girlfriends and make sure you all grow out and sharpen your fingernails before attending.
  6. Immediately upon entering, go to the back corner of the tiny shack and grab a mesh black bag.
  7. Grab everything and anything that looks interesting to you, remove the hanger so that each ensuing garment does not take up too much room in the aforementioned black mesh bag.
  8. When you are absolutely sure that you've grabbed everything which looks interesting to you, go to a corner of the store and sift through it carefully. Re-hang the rejects (you do not want to piss off the employees of this store; they are your friends). And proceed to the register to purchase.
Go, my fashion children, you shan't be disappointed.

Friday, June 6, 2008

Cotton v. Lycra: Denim Fabric Guide

Jeans Guide:

(this is a draft, I'll add more soon)

1. Cotton is more durable, and will last longer. In my brief obsessional stint with Rock and Republic, I came to the conclusion that I will not pay $250 for a pair of jeans which fits beautifully for 4 months and then falls apart. Jeans containing polyurethane (even in small amounts) WILL fall apart eventually. I will pay up to $600 for a pair of jeans, I believe if anything, jeans are worth paying for because they are worn 4X as often as other garments in my closet. But not if they have poly.
2. Lycra is a different story. My favorite pair of jeans ever have lycra in them and so far their shelf life is about 13 months. However, lycra shortens jeans life too, not as much as poly, but still. Keep this in mind when shopping for denim.
3. The break-in period with 100% cotton jeans is significant. It takes me about 2 weeks before I feel like they're 'mine.' However, once they are 'mine,' they fit better and more comfortably than any blend containing lycra or poly.

Monday, May 19, 2008

J BRAND: I don't hate you. I guess.

i'm not sure why i don't love these jeans. the cut, style, color and fit all perfectly embody my requirements for good denim. medium rise, flared leg, extra long, 100% cotton and free of the TRAGIC TRAGIC adolescent 'creasing' which is so tragically common these days.

they are everything i wanted in good denim, yet, i feel like singing that mildly cheesy but super fun song by the silversun pickups. "it's not quite right..." yes, i've been waiting for this moment... all... my.... life. but it's not quite right.

i think perhaps these j brand jeans are a good opportunity to explain the difference between *contemporary* denim and *designer* denim. i realize that the masses, the jessica simpson sheep of the world, cling to contemporary denim like fox news clings to reverend wright (seriously, i don't even like barak obama, but can we please STOP TALKING ABOUT SOME RANDOM SLIGHTLY ECCENTRIC DUDE WHO HAS ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING WHATSOEVER ON ANYTHING RELEVANT)

however, we are not fox news, and we thus have the responsibility to 1. consider unbiased facts, or 2. at least admit that we're biased. fair and balanced my ass.

for the purposes of this discussion, we're going to take the standpoint of 1., above. i know it's hard, but let's pretend jessica simpson doesn't exist for a few minutes.

contemporary denim hallmarks = obnoxious logo, trademark back pocket stitching, obnoxious colored stitching, weirdly placed side seams, loud and overbearing belt loops
designer denim hallmarks = beautiful, indisputably flattering, indescribably unfathomably tons and tons more superlatively awesome fit.

contemporary denim hallmarks = likelihood of feeling cool feel for 5 minutes before ass crack gets photographed by glamour magazine's 'don'ts.'
designer denim hallmarks = likelihood of inducing spontaneous multiple orgasms by both wearer and observers.

Monday, March 3, 2008


ohhhh hudson. i'm so disappointed in you. if i wanted an overly distressed waistband reminiscent of that heinous abercrombie and fitch 'destroyed' look, then i go to, well, abercrombie and fitch [shudder]. if i wanted a rise low enough to expose the top of my pubic bone, i'd buy some true religion. and if i wanted cheesy pocket details and generally adolescent-style denim decor, i'd go to DEB. yes, you know what DEB is. it's that traj store in every generic suburban american mall ever-- you know, the one with big electric pink lettered sign and racks of jessica-simpson-inspired rayon.

in fact, these jeans look just like the ones i saw on some tragic DEB-clad teenager last week. but for the length, they would be exactly the same.

now i know i'm not being entirely fair, the fabric is perfect-- durable enough to withstand both time and wear. the shape would be nice and generally flattering to all body types-- if the rise didn't allow my butt crack to peek out every time i think about sitting down. the color is a kind, classic, warm denim which is versatile.

but the details, hudson. the details. they're tragic. traj. tragic and traj. the belt loops, the pockets, the strategically placed 'distressing.' here's the thing about denim, hudson, the whole *point* is that the wearer does the distressing. not the designer. the wearer.

i'm going to bitch about this more later. in the meantime:

hudson supermodel jean: perfect gift for your teenage niece.


Monday, January 7, 2008

If Hillary Were a Harold.

From the beginning, I believed that this election would offer too much diversity to be discriminative, as two of the candidates (Obama and Richardson) are minorities, and one is of course a woman. However, as the boys-only treehouse becomes built, I am shocked and dismayed to see a group of boys gang up on the only girl as if their campaigns depended on it. And perhaps it's true that their campaigns do depend on it. It's business, I suppose, not personal. But still.

In Sunday night's debate, Clinton summarized the noted similarities between hers and Edward's healthcare proposals, which stands in contrast to Obama's. Within 5 minutes, a joined force of Edwards and Obama had declared themselves, and even one another, 'the candidates of change,' calling Clinton 'the status quo' and completely avoiding the issue at hand.

This incident wholly illustrates what I find most frustrating about the tag team-- that Obama declares himself a candidate for change, and Hillary-- well, she's just another politician. A revolution, Obama says, he leads a movement. These proclamations cannot help but have racial implications, which is fair enough. It wasn't so long ago that black Americans weren't allowed to sit at the front of the bus-- let alone run for president. I acknowledge whole-heartedly that we are sadly still place which is not colorblind, and I feel passionately supportive of the initiative to bring it forward.

However, I find it hypocritical to pose Obama's movement as if it were the only revolution. And as the campaign plays out, I am beginning to ask myself who will truly be a change from the norm. Moreover, I find it telling that the press, the bloggers, and even the candidates themselves, seem comfortable in implications related only to the fact that Hillary Clinton is a woman and all the while calling Obama a departure from the status quo.

For example:
Many argue that the force behind Barak Obama's recent popularity is due to new voters, who are younger and like the idea of 'a revolution.' On, arguably the most popular site for prospective young voters, political musings are offered for discussion. Among the questions: "Do you think a woman can be as effective a President as a man?"

Would it be socially acceptable for the same site to offer the question "Do you think a black person can be as effective a President as a white person?"

Or another example-- During the Iowa caucus campaign, a man stood up an interrupted Clinton, screaming "Iron my shirt!" repetitively, until he was removed from the facility.

How would the backlash play out if the same scenario were presented at an Obama event, if the question were related to stereotypes about black people, as opposed to women? And to bring that point a bit farther, would any bigot have the guts to show up at an Obama event and pose a command like that? Hell no.

In perhaps the most blatant display of complete and utter hypocrisy, the press today rags on Hillary Clinton for being 'emotional.' Apparently Clinton teared up a bit while answering a question about the pressures of campaigning. As one courageous blogger points out: Clinton isn't the only one who became a bit weepy, and in fact it was a male republican who shed the first tear.

I wouldn't be a recent law school graduate if I couldn't debate my own point, or if I didn't immediately feel required to discuss what the Supreme Court says about women as equals. That's right, I cannot finish this post without talking about Craig v. Boren, and the fact that unlike black v. white, women v. men are considered, well, different. That is, as far as the Supreme Court is concerned, white people and black people are created equal (all men are created equal, sigh). Women and men, however, are different-- which is why gender commands a different level of scrutiny in equal protection cases, and why, perhaps, it is socially acceptable to take shots at Hillary Clinton for being a woman. She is, after all, a woman, and women are, after all, different than men.

So, this discrimination is only fair, right? Perhaps.

It doesn't change the fact, however, that Obama rests solely upon his platform of change and revolution, where it seems obvious that the person who is truly dealing with a fighting a status quo here-- is Hillary Clinton.

Moreover, the examples above illustrate that Hillary Clinton isn't just being denied admission to the club house, she's being held to a significantly different standard than are the other candidates-- which of course begs the question-- what if she weren't a she? How successful would Harold Clinton be right now, with his experience, his noted Senatorial record, his eight freaking years in the Whitehouse, his aggressive yet matter-of-fact argumentative skills, and, well, his campaign in general?