I know I said the other day that I would watch Boston Legal until the end of the season (and I probably still will since there are only two episodes left), but after watching this past week's episode, Guantanamo By the Bay, I'm not sure if I can keep stomaching the left wing drivel that the show spews out. But it's not the content that bothers me as much as the procedural comedy of errors that is used to deliver the liberal agenda the show is premised on.
I haven't had the PMBR con law session yet, but I'm pretty sure any suits against the United States have to go into federal court. Maybe I'm wrong. Further, a motion to dismiss like that would be briefed and probably not decided on simple oral argument (since everything in the law is decided on oral arguments...). But maybe that's how fictionalized Massachusetts does it. Lastly, I haven't had the PMBR evidence session either, but I'm pretty sure you can't simply argue during cross and then finish by asking "right?" Something tells me PMBR's multiple choice questions won't be so cut and dry.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
Boston Legal: The end
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Look clown if you have an arguement then state it. 'Boston Legal' is a TV show that presents moral questions, and issues, to a wide audience. Most of us (non-lawyers) can understand the moral questions represented artistically on the show, and we can see them clearly without the restrictions placed upon the legal community in the form of "procedures", which you have spent countless hours memorizing which are TOTALLY USELESS in a moral arguement.
get ovewr that stupid moniker , lawyer, it is like "wrench" no moral consideration there. So now what is you beef?
Briareus from York Pennsylvania - it's a tv show with a very leftist agenda. I'm not sure what your argument is, and given that I haven't watched the show in over a year, I'm not sure I can even follow your point, if there even is one.
In reading this short post, I don't remember much about that episode. The point is that complex issues that are presented on tv or the news (for example, the $400k junket that the AIG top salespeople shortly after they received part of their bailout money) is that the general public only sees a small part of it. My beef is that people are snowballed into believing everything they see on tv without being fed the entire picture, which is misleading, deceptive, and spawns silly comments such as yours.
But you are certainly entitled to your opinion, whatever that may be.
Post a Comment