Raise them with some morals, never reward or coddle them for not succeeding, don't be their "friend", instill discipline in how they live their lives, hard work, and most of all teach them self responsibility.
If you do that, they will rule over the idiots that rats are raising. Rat parents should be embarrassed but we all know they are proud of their little idiots.
God help the legal profession.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/stanford-law-protesters-demand-names-redacted-news-reports-first-amendment-worksStanford Law protesters demand to have names redacted from news reports: 'Not how the First Amendment works'
The Washington Free Beacon schooled law students on freedom of the press
Last week, students at Stanford Law disrupted a Federalist Society event that featured U.S. Circuit Court Judge Kyle Duncan. Duncan was prevented from speaking by unruly protesters and berated by the school's associate dean of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
Now, some of the protest leaders, many of whom shared the names and pictures of Federalist Society members online and in posters, are unhappy because the Washington Free Beacon published their names.
"NEW: The same students who plastered the names and faces of the Stanford Federalist Society all over the school are now demanding anonymity from the Free Beacon. They say we've violated their right to privacy by identifying them. You can't make it up," Aaron Sibarium, a journalist for the Washington Free Beacon, tweeted Friday.
Comments
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/03/inside-stanfords-disgrace.php
As we have noted previously, the students responsible for the “inflammation” do not appear to be the sharpest tools in the shed:
The school’s chapter of the National Lawyers Guild—the organizing force behind the Maoist horde of would-be lawyers—papered the hallways prior to Judge Duncan’s arrival with the names and photographs of the Federalist Society’s board members.
Yet when Free Beacon reporter Aaron Sibarium quoted the group’s board members describing the protests as “Stanford Law School at its best,” and named those board members, we got a note from one of them, Lily Bou, demanding that we remove her name and those of her classmates. “You do not have our permission to reference or quote any portion of this email in a future piece.”
That’s not exactly how the First Amendment works.
There is more:
We’ve gotten similar complaints about publishing images—pulled from social media—of Stanford Law School dean Jenny Martinez’s classroom, which protesters covered end to end in flyers after she issued an apology to Judge Duncan.
We received the following note from Mary Cate Hickman, who identified herself as a second-year law student and describes herself on LinkedIn as “passionate about social justice” and a graduate of the Sorbonne.
Hickman demanded that we “anonymize the face of the student in the red hoodie” because “California is a two-party consent state, and you have no right to publish this student’s identity/likeness/face without consent.”
California is a two-party consent state for the recording of oral communications, not photographs, and even that only pertains to situations in which there is a presumption of privacy—that is, not a law school classroom in which student activists are snapping photographs and posting them to Instagram. Hickman did not respond to a request for comment.
Stanford should be embarrassed in more ways than one:
What’s eminently clear from the drama unfolding in Palo Alto is that while Stanford law students may be the vanguard of an anti-constitutional revolution, they don’t know much about the law. Where Stanford has failed to educate them in the limits of privacy and the rights of a free press, we will endeavor to fill the void with our continuing coverage of this ugly affair.
Sounds like Furd is preparing some good little fascists. Hopefully they all stay in higher Ed.