what brings you here

I recently installed a sitecounter on this blog, which doesn't tell me a whole lot - so you may all continue your furtive delight at the workings of my innermost tubes without worrying that I can see who you are - except what URLs refer people to here. And what I have learned is that more people are drawn to this blog by the search query "Jessica Simpson legs" than anything else. If you Google "Jessica Simpson legs," one of my blogposts is currently ranked #9 out of 690,000 results, and I bet this entry here will bump up that number a few notches.

Welcome, strangers! To your disappointment, I am a lezzard and a lawyer and more of a tits than an ass man*, anyway, so you will find no high resolution images of Jessica Simpson's undoubtedly shapely, firm, round mounds. Instead you will get the Smellera's description of her legs: cracked Ricola lozenges. (I don't control the Smellera - whatever it says goes!) Others arrive at this site after such embarrassing queries as "anal douche," "law school 4 or four-color pens analysis," "rube cube," "sticky rice," "glutinous rice tamales," or the more specific version of the original query, "jessica simpson 2008 legs spread." I can provide answers to none of your questions, which have proven so edifying, because I now know that what the people want are more practical posts. Less navel-gazing, more leg-gazing!

I will start by answering one of the search queries. When I started law school, I read some book that said to buy four-color pens or four different color highlighters and to underline the issue in green, the facts in black, the reasoning in blue, and the holding in red. Some other book said to draw little pictures about the case in the margins so that my memory could be jogged both by colorful lines and by caricatures. I very conscientiously followed the advice of these law advice books and bulletin boards, even though I hid in the library from the acquaintances I started to make because I was embarrassed to be identified as a striver. Nearly every word in my textbooks were sublimned by a colorful rug. I drew four lines on the inside covers of my textbooks just so I would have a legend to refer to if I forgot what the color green was supposed to go under. If I had not thrown away my Crim Law textbook in a fit of glee at the end of my Fall 2005 exams, what you would have seen inside it would resemble line graphs (because I have never been able to draw straight horizontal lines) by little drawings of ships exploding, the Cocoanut Grove on fire with 492 stick figures laying down with Xs where their eyes should be, and women who were forced by their husbands to eat from dog food bowls.

Did I draw a picture for Pennoyer v. Neff? I don't remember. I just tried drawing a memory-jogging picture about Pennoyer. I don't remember the facts of the case except that it involved property and some missing person and jurisdiction in personam or in rem.

(If you Google Image "jurisdiction in rem," you get this.) Sorry, Helen Hershkoff. You were a fine teacher but I was a poor student.

The answer to your query, dearest Googler, is stupid. The four-color pen technique is stupid. Drawing pictures of every case you read is stupid, unless you are trying to illustrate Carbolic Smoke Balls. Lots of the techniques you will be encouraged to follow are stupid. By the third or fourth week, the underlining plus outlining plus notetaking plus win, lose, or draw was tiresome and I gave up. I got a "B"ad grade in Crim but I'm pretty sure I would have gotten that grade anyway, because by mid-November I was far more interested in having More Than Words inside closets and under study room tables in Furman with my clandestine lover Estepho than I was in the Model Penile Code (which is how I referred to the MPC in my head, just like I thought of "torts" as my most delicious class). I gave up all those suggested techniques second semester and stuck to just sequestering myself in Bobst for the month of "A-"pril and wrung out a few "A-"wesome grades.

I kind of feel like I am going through this process again, meaning the search for a study method. Even though I have tried speaking to older, wiser friends about how to approach the bar, it all still seems like trial and error to me. I have a stack of half-finished flashcards (I wrote down the questions, but not the answers, because I got bored!) and half-finished "condensed" outlines (I started them but then Shivakamini sent me some third-party outlines, so why should I bother?), and torn up, out-of-order Conviser Mini Reviews all over my room. It looks like a twister has been through here. The other day I got 5 out of 18 questions correct on a Torts problem set. The problem sets are multiple choice with four answer choices, and 25% correct would be 4.5 questions out of 18, which means if I had just written AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA on my scantron I would have gotten just as much correct as I did when I sat down, scratched my head, and puzzled my way to the wrong answers. Whoopsie! I am going to Google "bar review four color pen study technique" and see what insightful stranger's blog that takes me to. This is the first result:

This paper investigates the interaction ability when introducing pressure into current basic interaction techniques by developing two novel techniques. A Zoom-based technique with pressure (hereafter referred to as ZWPS) is proposed to improve pixel-target selection. In this technique the pressure is used as a switch mode to couple a standard Point Cursor and a zoomable technique together.

Unhelpful! I am hoping to discover that blogging is the best way to study for the bar!

I AM GOING TO FAIL THE BAR!!!

* Lies! I am a bbraaaaaaaaains man! Bluster > bingos > seven-letter Boggle words > boobs > butts!