Tuesday’s TPS Report: Stretch Wool Military Blazer

Our daily TPS reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.

elizabeth james military blazerI’m not normally into the military trend, but something about this blazer just looks fabulous. Love the bit of lining sticking out on the cuffs, placket, and hem (is that satin? silk?) and the color and shape seem flattering and sophisticated. (I suspect it’s on sale because the model’s pose does such a poor job of showing the blazer!)  Was $425, now $255 at Bloomingdale’s Winter Sale & Clearance (sizes 0-8 still left). Elizabeth and James Stretch Wool Military Blazer

Seen a great piece you’d like to recommend? Please e-mail [email protected] with “TPS” in the subject line.



  1. Cute, but it looks huge on her.

    • I wonder if that’s why she’s posed like that- because it would look horribly boxy if she weren’t giving it some nipping at the waist by crossing her arms?

      I agree with Kat, though, that it is very cute (although I hate 3/4 sleeves on blazers with a passion), but I’d be worried about the boxyness (boxiness? box-yness?)

  2. unemployed Esq. :

    I hate it!

  3. This site gives better views of the jacket.


    I think it’s cute, but don’t think I’d wear it to work though.

    • Worst styling ever! Why on earth would they pair that jacket with a drapey gold cocktail dress!?!

      I agree, it’s pretty casual. I could only see it if you worked in a jeans-friendly, no one wears a suit ever, kind of business casual environment.

      • There’s a whole trend out there where they pair fancy cocktail dresses with casual jackets. It’s an ironic look that toughens up a look and sometimes, it actually does look nice.

    • middle-aged anon :

      Thanks for the alternate view, anon. I hope Forever 21 or even Target makes a replica of this, because it would look totally cute on my 12-year-old daughter, layered over a crewneck t-shirt.

  4. Divaliscious11 :


  5. I like this jacket, I think it’s cute, although I don’t like it $255 worth (let alone $425 worth). I think it would look great with a cranberry/rust colored top, jeans and boots. Maybe even a turtleneck or cowl neck.

    • I like this cheaper option to wear with jeans:


  6. Threadjack: We’ve had some interesting discussions on this site about the value of going to law school, so I thought that I would share this: http://www.cnbc.com/id/40863598

    The ABA has actually issued a warning on its site asking people to use caution in deciding whether or not to go to law school and warning of the financial burdens and bleak job prospects. Craziness, and I sure wish that I’d seen this coming (no one did, when I left a good job to start LS).

    • Makeup Junkie :

      that is…mind-boggling. I don’t regret going to law school though, despite the crushing debt and endless hours. Really. I mean that.

    • Confessions :

      I really wish I was given this warning. I graduated in 2008 and while I do have a job as an associate – I work in small law and have a small law salary, yet I’m expected to work as if I am in big law and have a big law salary. After undergrad, I had no debt and I was working as a paralegal and honestly much happier. Hopefully, things will change for me in time, but right now, I don’t see the benefit of law school financially.

      • Sallie Mae Has Come A Callin' :

        Confessions I’m in a similar boat. I just graduated this May and I work with a solo. Before I went to law school I had no debt at all and worked as a legal secretary, now I’m drowning in debt (and btw I went to an out of state – state school on a partial scholarship and lived frugally while in school). I’m working harder than I’ve ever worked in my life for peanuts. Just today I almost broke into tears when I heard about my repayment options through Direct Consolidation. I love “the law” and I want to be a lawyer, but not at this cost… If I continue at this pace, I’ll be broke and probably sick.

        Just trying to convince myself that overtime things will get better :-/

      • I work at a small firm and have the same billable hour requirement as my friends who work at the city’s biggest firm. My take-home after taxes is less than $40K/year. And we didn’t get a Christmas bonus this year because “things are just really tight this month.” Of course, the partners still found the funds to take their two-week skiing vacations before the holidays.

        It’s low pressure – no one cares what you do or when you do it as long as you make billables. But otherwise, there are no redeeming qualities to small law. I would NEVER do law school over again if I had the chance. I was making more money with no student loan debt before law school.

    • Anon in NC :

      I think it is a very good article. I graduated years ago with six figure debt (and still paying off). The current pool of available jobs and salaries for attorneys is atrocious!! I regularly see adds for document review attorneys, temp attorneys for $25/hr. I understand $25/hr is not a small amount of money in relative terms but I know of many people with other degrees or no degrees who can easily exceed that salary and have not gone through the 3 additional years and incurred the debt. I would tell anyone who wants to go into law to do so without incurring debt if possible and be very realistic about what is waiting on the other side.

  7. Here’s what I have noticed, and I wonder whether anyone agrees. A lot of the jobs today which are really law jobs (hearing officer, mediator, many agency decision-making jobs) are held by non-lawyers. Many lawyers do types of work that perhaps should not require a three year law degree (juvenile defense, accident cases, some criminal defense).

    How has this come about? With the availability of computer research, the law profession, which used to involved hnugh amounts of reading, has dumbed down. At the same time, many governmental employers shun lawyers for jobs where a knowledge of the law would be very helpful but is not actually essential.

    Let me hasten to say that the best hearing officer I have ever encountered was a non-lawyer.

    • I’m not sure that I’ve noticed that specifically, but I agree with you that there are a lot of things that are law, but don’t require the three year law degree (and so much of that three years is really mental masturbation, not real practical learning to apply to a job). I’ve argued myself that it would be more efficient to apply a little bit more of a “nurse:doctor” model in law, perhaps allowing paralegals to get, say, one year specialities in certain specific areas in which they could practice. (Of course, when I argued that, I thought that I would not be affected!)

      I think that what it comes down to is that the law school model has not adjusted to the changes in technology and times. And, given that they are still gaining applicants like mad, I guess that they have no incentive to adjust. There’s been a lot of pressure on the ABA to reign it in, so I guess it’s good to see them doing something, although this certainly looks to be too little, too late.

    • Wow! Children who are being prosecuted need lawyers. Maybe you think they don’t because so many defender offices consider juvenile defense as a stepping stone and not a profession. Some of the worst abuses by authority occurs against children. Recently, the public defender’s office in Miami successfully challenged the long-held, state-wide practice of parading the kids, chained together like slaves, in courtrooms, no matter the alleged offense. Young pre-pubescent kids charged with truancy (many of whom had been victims of sexual and physical abuse) were shackled with older violent gang members. So sad to see the importance of juvenile defense dismissed.

      • To Lyssa, so you are happy with the anti-intellectual trend toward vocational training for all jobs? No one need to know history or philosophy anymore, no even those who protect our rights? Just on the job training? Maybe the fact that so many lawyers see law school as “mental masturbation” is the reason that the law is no longer viewed as a noble profession.

        • I am a T5 law school grad (unemployed, despite my relatively high GPA and competitive-looking resume). You are accusing Lyssa of anti-intellectualism when in fact my reading is that she is just suggesting that there be more nuance, more options.

          But if I am to sum up my views in black and white: I absolutely see law school as mental masturbation — not for students (for whom it’s just a bad investment), but for professors, who bounce their dumb economics theories off their students and then make us Bluebook and publish their stupid articles, which add no value to the world. I didn’t learn a whit of history or philosophy in law school. But I did hear the name Coase a lot.

        • Oh please! What is it with commenters who take the most absurd exaggeration possible of what someone says, and then try to claim superiority over them for it?

          Many law schools teach classes on “law and movies”, “law and television”, or “law and literature”. I’ve even heard of a “law and The Simpsons” class out there somewhere. These classes sound like a blast, and they probably are, but they’re not educational in any sense of the word. Even outside of those sorts of classes, professors prefer to go off on tangents on their pet issues rather than teach the law and how to analyze it. Students don’t object because it’s fun, and a lot more interesting than learning how to determine whether or not a contract had proper consideration. They’re not thinking about what they’ll need to know three years from now when an actual person who could pay them is asking them a question, and it has nothing to do with Moe the bartender.

          Yes, these are mental masturbation. Yes, if a diversion from this and a focus on vocation-style training is a trend (which if it is, I’m not aware- it’s certainly not in the law), I’m all for it. If you think that’s anti-intellectual, then you and I clearly have completely different ideas of what “intellectual” means. (Mine would be the one that involves the use of intellect.)

          Aside: Good luck, Mandy. It’s ugly out there, but I hope that you find something soon.

          • I honestly think this is true of every professional and graduate school, not just law. There is something seriously wrong with the way graduate education is being handled in this country. I am in a graduate program and have had several professors that do not seem interested in preparing us for the real world, but in preparing us for a career in academics, which none of us want. I think the problem is in letting career academicians teach students who are interested in an actual, practical (and practicing) career out in the larger world. A career academician is always going to be more interested in their own research than in preparing their students for the real world, because producing research is how they keep their jobs. There are far too many business, law, and medicine classes being taught by people who have never substantially practiced law, medicine or business (although I think, from what I’ve seen, this is less of a problem in top MBA programs). It’s not a problem restricted to law education, and it’s something we need to address if we’re really serious about producing graduates who are actually prepared to get out and DO something substantive in their careers.

        • I teach at a law school, and I largely agree with Lyssa. In fact, I would argue that law school should always be a two-year degree, with an optional third year for specialization. I think the current law school model wastes a great deal of students’ time and money, largely without imparting the practical skills that lawyers need (particularly with regard to drafting).

          When I think about going into teaching full-time, it’s largely out of a desire to try to change this. It makes me very angry.

          • *Ann* (I can’t seem to reply to you directly) what type of program are you in? I was under the impression that medicine is generally taught by practicing physicians (albeit at teaching hospitals, but still very much functioning, level 3 hospitals…and usually some of the best in their geographic region).

          • Hear, hear!!!

            My mother is a teacher and when I showed her my law school curricula and explained the classes, she was in shock and asked when the teachers actually taught. I had to agree that, aside from two or three professors, the majority of the school did use classes for mental (and ego) masturbation, as it’s described here.

      • What if we had people who were not “lawyers” in the traditional sense, but had specialized training specific to Juvenile defense? I don’t know (I’m not a Juv. Def lawyer), but it could be a lot better than traditional lawyers, because of the specialization.

        The fact that the defender hasn’t had tax law or contracts isn’t going to hurt their ability to defend the kid, in that case.

        • That was in response to Taylor’s first post, about Juvenile Court.

          • Law is, in large part, an inherently analytical profession. As a result, a large part of legal education is or should be to teach you critical thinking skills.

            That’s not something you can do in a vocational training course. Anyone can look up the statute of limitations or what constitutes loiterring, etc. But only someone who understands basic legal principles can argue, e.g., that a particular loiterring statute is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, or violates the 4th amendment or whatever else. I could go on and on, but you absolutely do need someone who gets the big picture.

            The fact that all lawyers are not nec. brilliant or that not all law schools teach equally well is no reason to lower the bar for everyone involved.

            A lot of the work I do as an attorney is untangling the damage created by people who thought they could get something accomplished with adequate legal representation. I am all for law schools having practical skills courses like Trial Ad, but the reality is that that can all easily be learned on the job, and routinely is. But as concerns critical thinking — it’s really something you have to understand going in. And, those “useless” law review articles are often the basis for changing the law or expanding the reading of a statute, etc., so I wouldn’t be so quick to write them off. They are how “law” happens and evolves.

        • Not attacking, but just a clarification – so if someone actually spent three years taking nothing but black letter law classes, then they would not be classified as spending their time in mental masturbation?

          • I’m not trying to be that black and white, but, in theory, I would say no. In reality, as cbackson mentioned above, even a lot of the black letter classes involve the professors’ pet diversions. Some of that is fine, of course- stretching one’s thinking, keeping the students’ interests, and all of that, and some mental masturbation is fine for the same reasons (It’s pretty much what we’re doing right here, but of course, I don’t think Corporette is giving out credit these days), but you’ve got to learn the basic skills and analysis first.

            Think of a “funny teacher” you had in school- if the teacher adds in, say, five minutes of jokes throughout a 45 minute class, that’s great- students pay more attention and enjoy the class more, and the learning doesn’t suffer. But for many professors (certainly not limited to law, in fact, I think my law school was probably better than most, although my undergrad was lousy with it), the “jokes” (non-practical subject matter) dominate, and there’s little real learning. Class is more fun and interesting, but you don’t walk out with much ability.

            Oh, and in response to AIMS’ statement about on the job learning being available- not so much anymore. Many, many people who’ve graduated in the last 2-3 years are faced only with the option of hanging out their own shingle or joining a start-up. It’s not their fault; they simply have no other options (GPA and experience don’t help; a lot of it’s luck). The law firm model, with its umbrella of experienced partners holding your hand, is dying. That’s a big part of the problem that the ABA was addressing as noted in my original post.

        • pjbhawaii :

          @AIMS. I agree with you so much my teeth ache.

    • Interesting post. I’m not a lawyer, so I can only offer the perspective of how non-lawyers perceive and consider lawyers for positions for which law degrees are non-essential. When I was in federal government, there was a sense that lawyers often come in thinking that b/c they know the law they know everything they need to know about policy-making. In many cases people with no background at all were better than having to un-teach people what they think they know (I’ve heard entrepreneurs say something similar about MBA’s). Frankly, I found people with political science degrees the most difficult to work with. I also worked with two attorneys, one my senior the other my colleague, and in both cases their law background was helpful. Though the younger one did sometimes have to be reminded that having studied existing law was not a substitute for experience in lawmaking.

      • The Fed is notorious for allowing paralegals to act as lawyers. So wrong, on so many levels. By way of example, EEOC paralegal “investigators” make findings of cause/no cause for discrimination. They have a basic understanding of employment discrimination law, but it’s not nuanced, overlooks more recent developments in the law, and is pretty biased towards employers. It’s almost like they go off a checklist: “Did someone call you a sexist/racist name in a conference room and fire you on the spot?” If no, there’s no cause for discrimination. At some point, it presumably goes up the chain and is then merely rubber-stamped by an EEOC Regional Attorney. Travesty if I’ve ever seen one. Really f**’d up. (rant over, fanning myself).

        • I see how having an attorney in such positions would be useful…since in effect these paralegals are making legal decisions. I interpreted “chix pix” statement to be referring more to policy positions where a law background would apparently seem useful but it can also be a frustration to co-workers if it leads to a “know-it-all” attitude. I had no idea that so many positions like those you describe are farmed out to paralegals. I suspect it has something to do with cost-cutting measures. From what I’ve seen, the Fed loves to staff positions below a GS-11 or so with people who have the minimum requirements to do the job. Presumably b/c they are cheaper to hire.

          • What about people with public policy degrees? In full disclosure, I pursued a Masters in Public Policy and am now working in an almost all-lawyer group in government relations for a private company. Most of my classmates ended up in federal or state agencies as policy analysts.

          • *Anon2*, bear in mind this is my opinion based on my own experience, but I find public policy grads to be different. The ones I’ve worked with have strong quantitative backgrounds and analytical skills (I’m extra biased toward these because I’m a scientist by training). They are much more interested in the practical aspects of policy-making and its consequences.

            I’m sure it’s not all (and more than happy to be told I’m completely wrong), but the poli sci people I’ve worked with tend to have mostly a theoretical and abstract understanding of policy. This is fine for sweeping, big picture ideas, but they tend to refuse to compromise or adapt them to practical application. So they insist some policy is the right thing to do without a practical means of applying it or without really caring to test the consequences of it.

        • Confessions :

          In CA the DMV employs “Hearing Officers” to essentially act as both the DA and Judge and decide legal issues such as 1) Did the officer have probable cause to stop you, and arrest you; 2) was the arrest legal; and 3) was the driver over the legal limit

          And these hearing officers hear and rule on their own motions, and are not required to be attorneys or even have a B.A./B.S.

        • (This accidentally posted down below, so I’ll repost here).

          Though when I clerked for a district court and we reviewed social security ALJ decisions, we saw much the same thing and I assume those ALJs actually are lawyers. I see the same thing with agency employees -lawyer and non – in the federal agency my practice currently involves a lot of contact with. I feel like certain (by no means all) government agencies foster a culture of rubber stamping and non-creative thought (someone I worked with dubbed it “Faith Based Regulation”) and the law degree is the least part of that.

          • @V, some of the worst miscarriages of justice occur by federal agencies with oversight over significant, substantive legal and economic rights — EEOC, Social Security Agency, the VA, INS, and even USDOJ Civil Rights & the AUSA (ok, now sue me! LOL).

      • As a 2nd career lawyer/1st career engineer, and I agree w/ all the comments re: law school is just 3yrs of mental masturbation so you can get the piece of paper to get your foot in the door. I find that the liberal arts-to-law school, never-had-any-other-job, whole-family-is-lawyers types tend to put the most value on law school and history/philosophy and piddle on “vocational” subjects, but I attribute that to being out of touch with how the rest of the world operates.

        • Mmm. My mother worked two jobs, and I worked my way through school and then got a job for three years before going to law school – no lawyers in the family. I loved law school and feel sorry for anyone who thought it was boring, or a waste of time, or mental masturbation. Guess from my perspective, if you actually have worked for a living, you are not looking to college to teach you how the real world operates. To me, civil rights and due process are not pie-in-the-sky concepts, but those who just want a trade school will soon find how much we are losing.

        • Anonymous :

          Also a 2nd career lawyer, and I appreciate Taylor’s viewpoint. If you’re interested in the law as a means of, or lens for viewing, social change (either as an actor or as an academic), you might really enjoy the discourse you can find at law school. That said, I went to law school to become transactional lawyer, and one year of con law/crim law/seminars on social activism was enough for me, considering I was shelling out mucho bucks for the pleasure of thinking about topics I could read/think about on my own or talk about with friends. I think a one- or two-year law school program is sufficient to learn the basics of the critical thinking and involve the discourse Taylor mentions — I don’t think law school needs to take 3 years.

    • pjbhawaii :

      It’s scary and depressing that you — or anyone — thinks that juvenile defendants, “some” criminal defendants, and accident victims merit only some sort of a “trade school” lawyer or a paralegal to represent them. It’s a mean and corrupt world out there –a trained, analytical, critically thinking, real attorney should represent any person charged with a crime, or an accident victim, no matter what the age of the defendant.

      • pjbhawaii, maybe only big corporations deserve to have the truly educated professionals represent them in court?

  8. Forever 21 shout out :

    Went to Forever 21 over the weekend after not going in for years. Bought two really great long necklaces that DON’T look cheap. Was pleasantly surprised by how nice and inexpensive the F21 jewelry is.

    • middle-aged anon :

      I’m envious – let us know if/when it breaks or wears out! I was thrilled years ago when I found just the necklace I was looking for at Anchor Blue – a cascade of round “gold” links. Looked fantastic for about 30 days and then the “gold” finish wore off/tarnished overnight.

      • I <3 F21 accessories (belts, especially!).

        • Irecently got a cute long multi-strand ‘pearl’ and ‘gold’ link necklace from F21 that I wore the other day with a black silk blouse and a light grey cashmere skirt. Loved it!

    • I’ve found some cute inexpensive jewelry at Charlotte Russe as well. Its nice to have cheaper pieces in order to have more options.

    • Forever 21 shout out :

      Thanks all! I’m hoping it won’t wear out too quickly, but to be honest, for $5, I’m figuring the necklace was a steal even if only lasts six months. Most of my jewelry is the “good”, real kind, but it’s nice to have some cheaper options to add into the mix. I’m quite pleased. My mom, who had never been inside F21, was shocked by how nice it all was.

      We went into Charlotte Russe too, but F21 jewelry was way better.

      • What constitutes costume jewelry? A lot of my jewelry is from Swarovski (man made crystal). Is that “real” or costume?

        • In my mind, anything that is not made with precious metals (silver, gold, platinum) or not containing precious stones (diamonds, rubies,emeralds or saphires) falls under the heading costume jewelry.

          Others may have their own definitions/parameters.

          • Costume just means synthetic or manufactured. Costume cannot by definition be made of a natural stone, even if that stone is not a “precious” stone like a diamond. Hence, the name “costume” . . . as in it’s fake.

        • SF Bay Associate :

          Costume, but lovely. “Real” are made from gold, platinum, silver, gemstones, pearls. I have a Swarovski necklace I love and am looking to pick up more pieces as I come by them on sale, but I do not think of them as “real” jewelry. Another way to think about it: my home insurance knows about my (inherited) pearl necklace as part of my jewelry rider, but doesn’t need to know about my Swarovski.

        • Thanks for the clarification. Some of my favorite jewelry is from Swarovksi!

        • Anonymous :

          Costume jewelry is anything not made from actual jewels – i.e. gemstones and precious metals. It’s not a pejorative, though. A lot of costume jewelry is beautiful and expensive.

          • I also think “organic” is a good way to think aout jewelry. I have jade, coral, pearls, lava, fossils – all not “costume” jewelry.

          • Anonymous :

            @eyes – I should have been broader than gemstones. I meant any genuine stones – including jade, coral, etc, as you mentioned.

    • You should try an ALDO accessories store if you have one closeby – a little more expensive (think $10-20) but better quality than Target and they often have “two for one” sales where you can buy a couple of opera length funky necklaces for $20. Not bad.

    • Anon in DC :

      I love Express for costume jewelry. It, too, is a little more expensive than Forever 21, but still inexpensive relative to a lot of other places and I’ve gotten some of my favorite pieces there. (I’m not a fan of their general “sexy work attire” aesthetic, but I swear, some of their jewelry is great!

    • I used to do really well at NY&Co for jewelry. And I admit that I have some earrings from Claire’s that I love because they never tarnish. Makes it easier to look nice when I haven’t gotten around to cleaning some of my jewelry…

  9. I’m not sure that I’ve noticed that specifically, but I agree with you that there are a lot of things that are law, but don’t require the three year law degree (and so much of that three years is really mental masturbation, not real practical learning to apply to a job). I’ve argued myself that it would be more efficient to apply a little bit more of a “nurse:doctor” model in law, perhaps allowing paralegals to get, say, one year specialities in certain specific areas in which they could practice. (Of course, when I argued that, I thought that I would not be affected!)

    I think that what it comes down to is that the law school model has not adjusted to the changes in technology and times. And, given that they are still gaining applicants like mad, I guess that they have no incentive to adjust. There’s been a lot of pressure on the ABA to reign it in, so I guess it’s good to see them doing something, although this certainly looks to be too little, too late.

    • Sorry, that was supposed to be a reply to chix pix

    • I seem to recall that there’s something akin to that certification for certain types of immigration practice – where you can get certified to help people with immigration (but perhaps not asylum?) applications without a three year law degree. It makes perfect sense to me, and I imagine it would be applicable to other areas too. Perhaps bankruptcy?

      • lawyerette :

        There are “bankruptcy preparers” who are allowed to help people fill out forms, can charge a fee (usually a few hundred dollars instead of a few thousand for an attorney), BUT are not allowed to give people legal advice (which is IMO, VERY important in a bankruptcy case).

      • Really, mental masturbation? Call me crazy, but going to law school did teach me to “think like a lawyer.” I’m always debunking things, challenging concepts, mounting counterarguments, figuring out the weakness in a premise, etc. Remember in Moot Court how the first lesson was to write the factual statement to support your legal argument. I guess it’s a form of “spin,” but much different than political or media “spin.” More precise, surgical. Read a Supreme Court opinion with which you strong disagree and agree. Not an easy thing to master, IMHO, and I’m still learning after 10+ years of practicing law.

        • Though when I clerked for a district court and we reviewed social security ALJ decisions, we saw much the same thing and I assume those ALJs actually are lawyers. I see the same thing with agency employees -lawyer and non – in the federal agency my practice currently involves a lot of contact with. I feel like certain (by no means all) government agencies foster a culture of rubber stamping and non-creative thought (someone I worked with dubbed it “Faith Based Regulation”) and the law degree is the least part of that.

          • Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to the discussion about the federal government and paralegals up above. Have no idea how it ended up here.

        • Ballerina girl :

          Agreed. As much as I sometimes wonder whether it was a good use of money, I never doubt it was a good use of my time. I’ve never learned more in a three year period and probably never will.

        • Anonymous :

          Yes, but I think one year of teaching you “how to think” is sufficient for most people. The most useful class in law school for me was real property. Even though the concepts are archaic and worth next to nothing in my current practice, my instructor made sure we understood how to analyze and counter arguments. Everything else for a transactional attorney (and I suspect litigators) is black letter law and practice. I would be in favor of one- or two-year programs with an optional third year in which to gain a specialty and/or work.

          • This. Were you in my real property class (ca 1983)? The other class that was *really* useful re developing critical legal thought capability was Con Law (same prof; whole year).

            Have to agree that the ‘fundamentals’ are out of kilter – too much supply and the law schools just keep multiplying and pumping it out (and it’s ridiculously cheap/profitable for them to do it), virtually no increase in demand (inter alia, it’s the economy, stupid) and tremendous cost control pressure from the consumer side – well, really, what are all those liberal arts grads who now have refined capacity for critical/legal thought supposed to do? Biglaw isn’t gonna be paying back their loans anymore, not so much….and neither is corporate America.

            IMHO, the ABA should man up and stop accrediting law schools by the dozen AND the government (whoever/whatever that is) should stop just blindly giving out the taxpayers’ $$ on low interest law school student loans whose borrowers don’t have a snowball’s chance in h*ll of earning enough to support themselves/their families on for the next two years, never mind repay the loans (or even the interest on them) in this lifetime.

            Oh, and ps – I am looking at you, Biglaw managing partners, recall that poor dude at Kilstock (who had successfully argued ~20 appeals at SCOTUS) that offed himself last year – the ONLY way this little construct works even for the short term (the only way it works at all) requires the worker bees (associates; then non equity partners) to sacrifice essentially their lives for a couple of decades, and then, irrespective of talent and/or accomplishment, be met with ‘oh, sorry, we didn’t mean that if you did ALL THAT, you’d have a CAREER here, and we know you are profitable but we can make more on the next lowest class/lower hourly rate, what we meant was we wanted a ‘partner’ who would independently go gin up a few million in blue chip, no questions asked, full rate 100% collectible work’ – how many of any given year’s grads will ever have THAT? Really.

            This profession generally sucks, especially for new admittees, and it does so more every year as more & more law grads are ‘admitted’ to it…because there is not a demand for this volume AND because a lot – not all – of what we do does NOT require super high level critical thought. It just requires ditch digging at a paper level, much of which could be done WITHOUT three years of academe……..and the hundred+ thousand of debt associated with that academe requires.

      • Another Sarah :

        Yup. I was certified to help applicants fill out naturalization forms as an undergrad at my internship. Granted, if there were any problems or issues, it immediately got taken out of my hands and into the paralegal/attorney’s. But my signature and contact info is on more than a few run-o-the-mill naturalization applications.

      • I practice immigration law, and I would guess around 30-40% of my clients have come to our firm because their case was messed up by someone incompetent, often one of these consultants, licensed or not. Immigration law is extremely complex, and even many of the lawyers who practice it do not do an adequate job of understanding it. Add to that the vulnerable nature of the client population, and you have a lot of mistakes and misconduct going on. One thing that helps is that as attorneys when we practice we put our licenses, which we went to great lengths to acquire, on the line.

    • I’m glad the ABA issued this warning. It’s bleak out there, and about time they warned people.

      Not all law schools are a traditional 3-year program. There are a few that require “co-op”, or a large amount of practical experience as a requirement for gradulation. Drexel and Northeastern both do this. It’s such a better idea than academic navel-gazing all 3 years. (Not all the intellectual law seminars are bad, but I think students can get their fill by the end of 2L year.)

  10. Seems very-well made (94% wool, silk lining). Spoiled by sample sales at iDeeli, Ruelala, HauteLook, Gilte. I could see spending $129 on this, max, at one of those sites.

  11. Just a vent post. I’m just entering my third trimester of pregnancy and it has hit me full force. Nausea and acidity yesterday and a tummy upset at night, so I ended up waking up several times in the night to go to the bathroom. Cant figure out if it was what I ate for lunch yesterday (crepes) or dinner (curry) since I was feeling sick through the day, it just got worse after dinner.
    This morning had to get up early to drop hubby off at the airport before work. Tried to eat some thin oatmeal at 11am with water but as I was driving to work I had to pull over for some vigorous gagging (nothing came out, and I had a plastic bag ready). At work now and I am pondering cancelling some meetings and going home. Problem is I already took a few sick days around Thanksgiving because I was sick with a fever and cough/cold. I don’t want to seem like a slacker.
    Also have an evening hospital orientation class that I signed up for after work (going alone since hubby is out of town). Going to see if I can postpone it (though it’s paid up).
    I really want to go home and have someone take care of me. Sigh. I know many of you battle much worse days so I hate to rant about garden variety nausea and pukiness. I’m not used to being so debilitated by it though. Just looking for some kind words!

    • That sounds awful. I hope you feel better.
      If you have any chamomile tea around, try to drink a cup or 2 — it really helps with nausea & indigestion. Same for ginger.
      Hang in there :)

      • BummerRRR. Get your rest. Be a slacker now, because when you return from maternity leave, the expectation is that you will work your a** off like you never had a baby at all. (Sorry! True, IMHO!).

      • Thanks AIMS! Got a cup of chamomile tea right after I saw your message and you’re right, even the smell of it seems to make me feel better! Sipping it now. :)

    • Ugh. It sounds like you’re really pushing yourself. You’re in your 3rd trimester. You don’t have to work this hard.

      Could your hubby have taken a cab this morning?

      Give yourself a break, chica. You deserve it.

      • In retrospect, I should’ve asked him to! Another hour of much-needed sleep probably would’ve helped.

    • My Dr told me that nausea in the 3rd trimester is often just a form of heartburn. Have you tried Mylanta, etc? The liquid stuff works much better than the tablets. And try laying off the spicy curries and heavy meals in general. Once I get to trimester three (and this is my third time there), I’m pretty much on small light meals only (often more than 3 in a day) because of exactly this. Good luck — it’s almost over!

    • I was never more miserable in my life than in the last 4 weeks of pregnancy. It just sucks. You have a basically full-size baby in there kicking the crap out of you, sitting/kicking/head-butting your bladder, pushing on your stomach, etc. Then you have the crazy hormones coming out in full force to get you “ready for labor” but in reality just making you nuts. I was always too hot, uncomfortable, tired, sick, cranky, emotional or whatever. Feh on it, feh! (or PHOOEY as some would say :)
      Give yourself a break. Go home. Get rest. The last month of pregnancy is designed, I believe, to make you so sick of being pregnant you will endure anything to get the baby out. Be gentle with yourself. No one hands out medals for being a good soldier through the last month. Hang in there. :)

      • Ann, wish I only had 4 weeks to go – I actually have 3 whole months left. (FOOEY!). After a beautiful second trimester these symptoms coming in full force just surprised me!

    • And also, really, you don’t need to be oriented at the hopsital. It’s fine if you want to do it, but it’s not like they’ll leave you wandering aimlessly around otherwise. We did all that stuff, but in retrospect, we totally could have skipped it if it had been more important to get some rest.

      • Yeah, I didn’t get oriented and I survived. Admittedly, my husband and I were wandering around the hospital at 1 in the morning, me pausing every minute to have a contraction against a handrail (I didn’t realize it at the time, but I was 9cm dilated and in transition). The most laughable part was when my husband said “oh look this is a shortcut” and showed me 2 flights of stairs. No. Friggin. Way. 2 years later, I look back on it and survived.

        Also, the nausea is probably acid reflux (your lower esophageal sphincter — where the esophagus joins the stomach — is probably in your chest now, and that pressure change creates an open valve) and Pepcid complete was my Godsend for the last trimester. The curry probably didn’t help.

        Hang in there. You’ll get the hang of this part of pregnancy, and limit your activity a little bit. You’ll get through, and at the end? Brand new baby. Totally worth it.

    • Sorry you’re feeling so bad! Sympathy and hugs… and a little hypochondria: Is there any chance it could be appendicitis? I’m not pregnant, but your symptoms sound a lot like what I experienced before going to the hospital (at my mother’s urging), and ended up having an emergency appendectomy. With your belly it might be hard to tell, but I would google symptoms of appendicitis and see if there is pressure/pain if you press on what would have been the mid-point diagonally between your navel and your right hipbone (pre-pregnancy) — it’s called McBurney’s point.

      • ooh… good call. Samantha’s symptoms definitely sound like what I went through w/ an almost burst appendix.

    • I love this site, thanks for all your support! Going home now, and I managed to postpone the hospital orientation class so I can attend one next week instead.
      AT and Kady – thanks for the heads up. I dont feel pain in my right side, but I googled it and it does say pregnant women don’t feel it in the same place. I’ll call my doctor and describe my symptoms to her just so I can rule appendicitis out.

      • Definitely do – I have a very close friend whose appendicitis was not caught because her symptoms were attributed to her pregnancy, and her appendix ruptured (fortunately, after she gave birth). It can definitely be missed in a pregnant woman if a doc is not looking for it!

      • Preggo Angie :

        It will go by fast… I only have 5 more weeks left (but going out on maternity leave in 3.5 more weeks) and am starting to FREAK OUT about all the stuff I have left to do, both at home and at work. Best of luck on the rest of your pregnancy! Hope you feel better!

  12. Military I don’t mind, but this color looks dull as dirty dishwater.

  13. cannot get my comment to post! :


  14. Little bit of a threadjack.

    I saw this purse on Endless (sorry for the redonkulous link, can’t figure out how to make it shorter) because I like that its both brown AND black, so would theoretically match either color scheme outfit. But, then I worry that it would actually match neither. Then I was concerned.

    Thoughts? Thanks. :)


    • I think that’s what they’re trying to go for, too, but in my opinion, it just doesn’t look very good. Like weird-looking dual-tone jewelry.

      Something like maroon or green or purple would also go with both black and brown. (And it would be prettier than this bag.)

    • Yeah, not feeling the brown and black together. I’d go for the red, but that’s just me.

    • Ooh, I do not like this at all. Sometimes brown and black looks ok, like if it’s part of a pattern, but this just looks like they ran out of black leather so stuck on a brown pocket. Why not get the red one, which will also go with both brown and black?

    • I actually bought and returned this, in red, from Endless last month. I am still on the hunt for a good work bag, but this just didn’t “fit” me well — the straps didn’t sit well on my shoulder, and the bag is very structured so that even when mostly empty it felt like it jutted out too much (which contributed to the straps falling down — possibly b/c there wasn’t enough weight in the bag to anchor it to my shoulder?). Not a great description, but just a heads up. Definitely recommend Endless (and Zappos, etc.) though – their quick and free shipping both ways is a life saver.

  15. got to say, I don’t really like it.

  16. Nausea in the 3rd ttrimester of pregancy is out of the ordinary, and you should see your doctor immediately.

  17. Howdy! This is kind of off topic but I need some guidance from an established blog.
    Is it hard to set up your own blog? I’m not very techincal but I can figure things out pretty fast. I’m thinking about creating my own but I’m not sure where to begin. Do you have any ideas or suggestions? Thanks

work fashion blog press mentions