Tuesday 24 May 2011, NEW YORK, NEW YORK - The Ninth Amendment editors and staff sincerely urge readers NOT TO AVOID PAYING TO READ UNLIMITED NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLES SIMPLY BY SETTING THEIR FIREFOX BROWSERS TO "PRIVATE BROWSING".
The Ninth Amendment apologizes to our loyal readers for a brief post here as rapid global developments find many world bureau personnel out in the field. We are unfortunately in the position of having to report that the New York Times today apparently ignored or because of Ninth Amendment technical difficulties did not publish comments in its digital edition regarding big-firm lawyers now working on two-tier partnership and non-partnership tracks. Also the Times failed to offer any critical analysis of a heinous practice it revealed about major US airlines.
As to major law firms, since many of the editors and staff of the Ninth Amendment have had the displeasure of attending top law schools and working for big city law firms including in New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, the Ninth Amendment felt compelled to correct the misinformation promulgated by the Times that the two-tiered system is anything new. It has been around at least since the 1980's when Ninth Amendment editors and staff were at these firms.
Furthermore, the Times observation that a job at these firms is felt to be something near nirvana in the world of "business jobs" is so far off the mark we felt compelled to point out that in states such as California and New York, the Times merely needed to call the State Bars and learn that polls of big firm attorneys who do almost no real "pro bono" or "public interest" work reveal that most of them are about two steps away from hanging themselves they are so dissatisfied with their work.
As to the second digital article presented in the Times, it entirely failed to offer any critical observation whatsoever of its report that all major US airlines make NO provision for doctors on board, rely entirely on random passenger doctors' goodwill to save seriously ill other passengers, some of whom actually die. And that finally there are NO requirements as to the contents of any emergency medical kits kept on planes, so that doctors who volunteer under the risks of the so-called "Good Samaritan Rule" to come to the aid of other passengers have no idea whether they will find a very well-stocked medical emergency kit or one that has been outfitted with practically nothing or picked over so it merely contains perhaps a band-aid and an empty bottle of hydrogen peroxide.
Some doctor passengers actually help these multi-billion dollar major airline corporations out by carrying their OWN emergency kits knowing it is a total crap-shoot as to what the airline may have provided. The thought that these major corporations can put our lives in total jeopardy like this while everyone is supposedly being protected from "terrorists" is ludicrous and criminally negligent in our opinion. Pilots actually have no training in these circumstances and often ask the doctor, who may have a completely different specialty, to decide for them whether they should LAND THE PLANE!
Just see what happens when any one of us happens to ask the airline for a "favor" at the ticket counter, doctor or not, much less medical aid! Our readers know they will be treated rudely, unfairly, and if they are too difficult taken away in chains. Charity for airlines. Come on, New York Times, what a joke! Those full-page airline advertisements in the New York Times must buy the airlines just a "little something" when it comes to editorial content as the Times presents "All the News We Were Not Paid-Off Not to Print".
Cannot read our comments in those "Big City Papers" and learn the real scoop? Well that just means the Ninth Amendment will be expecting to welcome more visitors here when readers need the news fast, true, and uncompromised. Live the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. As always, in the spirit of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. God Bless America!
Copyright 2011 Big M and Little L All World Rights Expressly Reserved
The Ninth Amendment apologizes to our loyal readers for a brief post here as rapid global developments find many world bureau personnel out in the field. We are unfortunately in the position of having to report that the New York Times today apparently ignored or because of Ninth Amendment technical difficulties did not publish comments in its digital edition regarding big-firm lawyers now working on two-tier partnership and non-partnership tracks. Also the Times failed to offer any critical analysis of a heinous practice it revealed about major US airlines.
As to major law firms, since many of the editors and staff of the Ninth Amendment have had the displeasure of attending top law schools and working for big city law firms including in New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, the Ninth Amendment felt compelled to correct the misinformation promulgated by the Times that the two-tiered system is anything new. It has been around at least since the 1980's when Ninth Amendment editors and staff were at these firms.
Furthermore, the Times observation that a job at these firms is felt to be something near nirvana in the world of "business jobs" is so far off the mark we felt compelled to point out that in states such as California and New York, the Times merely needed to call the State Bars and learn that polls of big firm attorneys who do almost no real "pro bono" or "public interest" work reveal that most of them are about two steps away from hanging themselves they are so dissatisfied with their work.
As to the second digital article presented in the Times, it entirely failed to offer any critical observation whatsoever of its report that all major US airlines make NO provision for doctors on board, rely entirely on random passenger doctors' goodwill to save seriously ill other passengers, some of whom actually die. And that finally there are NO requirements as to the contents of any emergency medical kits kept on planes, so that doctors who volunteer under the risks of the so-called "Good Samaritan Rule" to come to the aid of other passengers have no idea whether they will find a very well-stocked medical emergency kit or one that has been outfitted with practically nothing or picked over so it merely contains perhaps a band-aid and an empty bottle of hydrogen peroxide.
Some doctor passengers actually help these multi-billion dollar major airline corporations out by carrying their OWN emergency kits knowing it is a total crap-shoot as to what the airline may have provided. The thought that these major corporations can put our lives in total jeopardy like this while everyone is supposedly being protected from "terrorists" is ludicrous and criminally negligent in our opinion. Pilots actually have no training in these circumstances and often ask the doctor, who may have a completely different specialty, to decide for them whether they should LAND THE PLANE!
Just see what happens when any one of us happens to ask the airline for a "favor" at the ticket counter, doctor or not, much less medical aid! Our readers know they will be treated rudely, unfairly, and if they are too difficult taken away in chains. Charity for airlines. Come on, New York Times, what a joke! Those full-page airline advertisements in the New York Times must buy the airlines just a "little something" when it comes to editorial content as the Times presents "All the News We Were Not Paid-Off Not to Print".
Cannot read our comments in those "Big City Papers" and learn the real scoop? Well that just means the Ninth Amendment will be expecting to welcome more visitors here when readers need the news fast, true, and uncompromised. Live the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. As always, in the spirit of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. God Bless America!
Copyright 2011 Big M and Little L All World Rights Expressly Reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment