Mine, yours and hours
Mar 12, 2008 Americana, Gelt, Lex scripta
I linked to this story as an update to the previous item, but I did just notice this on re-reading it:
“NY first lady’s charmed life slips away”:
Eliot Spitzer was born into wealth, the son of a New York real estate developer. His wife’s background is more modest.Silda Spitzer, 50, grew up in Concord, N.C., where her father was a hospital administrator. She attended Meredith College, a women’s college in Raleigh, N.C., and went from there to Harvard Law School, where she met Spitzer, and to a career in mergers and acquisitions.
While at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, a prestigious New York law firm, she billed as many as 3,300 hours a year — more than nine hours a day, including weekends.
3,300 hours?
Oh, so it turns out she’s actually, um, a liar and a crook herself! “More than nine hours a day, including weekends.” That’s with a wink, people. I’ve worked in a big firm, and believe me: After 2200 the hours get very, very soft. Above 2500 they’re gauzy. Pushing the high 2000’s and they’re mist.
At 3,300, my friends, you are in the realm of pure imagination.
Except for the client that pays the invoice.
Lots of grey tones in life, huh.
That doesn’t make it okay, what her husband did to her, but … it does tell you a little bit about the kind of person who would hook up with an Eliot Spitzer.
UPDATE: Note today’s Classic Poem of the Day from About.com!
YET MORE: And now he has resigned… evidently with Mrs. Spitzer at his side. And they are saying that she is the one who pushed most adamantly for him not to quit. And then you see a thing or two about ambitious people, and how they are drawn together.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
After 2200 the hours get very, very soft. Above 2500 they’re gauzy. Pushing the high 2000’s and they’re mist. At 3,300, my friends, you are in the realm of pure imagination. Except for the client that pays the invoice.
HAHAHAHAHahahahahaha! Ron, I have to tell you (and please don’t take offense): whenever someone has to tell me that they’re an honest lawyer, I reach for my wallet.
P.S. “…it does tell you a little bit about the kind of person who would hook up with an Elliot Spitzer.” That’s a cheap shot.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Hah! You nailed that one Ron.
Also, when did she have children? You can’t be doin’ all that billin’ while raisin’ kids — not enough hours in the day.
If you are billing 3,300/year — that means you are billing a heluva lot for “thinking” about the case, and perhaps even the time change, when you fly coast to coast!
HankB
March 12th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Birds of a feather. I was listening to Dr. Laura this morning and she mentioned, and this wasn’t at all connected to the Spitzer drama, that when a husband cheats his wife usually has a hand in it. She stressed that it’s well within the wife’s power to ensure her man doesn’t wander. It just takes putting his needs over hers. Which, I thought, that was the point of a marriage anyway.
But modern feminism tells us the needs of the man doesn’t matter and to think about meeting those needs keeps women chained to the stove.
Not that I’m saying Eliot Spitzer doesn’t carry any blame. In fact, as the man of the household, I think he carries most of the blame. When a time for accounting comes God is going to the husband for an explanation. And blaming Eve didn’t work last time.
That said, feminism is demanding women give up their power to obtain power. It’s the most ass-backwards thing I ever heard. If women wants a man that will cater to their every whim then they need to return the favor. That’s power. The power to give. And not to give in order to receive. But to give because you have to give. And by “have to give” I mean it’s commanded to do by God. Love is an act of will. God never asks us to love Him. He commands us. We choose to love Him like we choose to love our spouse. Love that isn’t a choice is nothing more than lust. And lust is purely selfish.
Feminism wants women to lust after men – not love them. Lust wants to receive. Love wants to sacrifice.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Sayonara, Spitz!
So as he flies the blue ladies of the Emperor’s Club into the sunset, we say “aloha, 5 O’clock Elliot” and return to our duties. Let me remind you the Weblog is open 24 hours for your dining and dancing…
March 12th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
when a husband cheats his wife usually has a hand in it.
…waiting…
She stressed that it’s well within the wife’s power to ensure her man doesn’t wander.
…waiting…
It just takes putting his needs over hers.
…waiting…
Which, I thought, that was the point of a marriage anyway.
…waiting…
No punchline.
WTF??
March 12th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
She was gettin’ her yayas whenever he f***ed someone publicly. I don’t cry for her.
March 12th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I occasionally try to be serious. Occasionally.
I’m one of those kooks that thinks a marriage isn’t a partnership and that the two parties in it have distinct and important roles to play. If those roles aren’t being played and respected, well, you get a national divorce rate of over 53%.
Yeah, this “partnership” thing is working out real well. It seems to be that the attempt to redefine marriage has already been done and homosexuality has nothing to do with it.
Marriage: Where the women are men and the men can shut the hell up.
No wonder more and more men are on a marriage strike. They’re not respected nor really wanted.
March 12th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Have you ever been married? I mean, like, in this lifetime?
March 12th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Kevin,
I agree absolutely with you. In a partnership, both parties will be constantly checking to make sure that the other is pulling his weight or else he won’t pull his. Not conducive to a marriage. Marriage is really about each side accepting 100% on themselves without conditions.
Ara,
Kevin is right. So is Dr. Laura. And yes, I’m married. Happily for 24 years now. But I also agree that it’s not easy to find a good wife these days.
March 12th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Mike:
You didn’t read what Kevin wrote, otherwise you wouldn’t have said this in “agreement” with Kevin:
Marriage is really about each side accepting 100% on themselves without conditions.
In Kevin’s world, there is no “each side.” In Kevin’s concept of marriage, “It just takes putting his needs over hers. Which, I thought, that was the point of a marriage anyway.”
I’m the last guy to offer advice on somebody else’s marriage, so let me ask you a question instead: Is that how your marriage works?
P.S. Kevin: come on now — have you ever been married?
March 12th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Ara,
What I meant was this. There are 2 aspects that I feel are vital to my marriage or any marriage:
1. Both husband and wife are dedicated to fulfilling their traditional masculine and femenine roles.
2. Both do their best at these roles without constantly measuring if the other is doing their share.
But here’s Kevin’s point, as I understand it: both the traditional roles, masculine as well as femenine, include caring for your spouse’s needs above your own. That is what a traditional marriage is all about. Wives caring for husbands. Husbands caring for wives. Modern marraiges are more like “deals” and more competitive. Kevin will correct me if I got him wrong.
(And now I must step out to attend a wedding!)
March 12th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Maybe SHE should run for President.
March 12th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Here’s an example. I forgot to tell my husband that I had ordered Girl Scout cookies from some one at work, so when he stopped at the store for me, he picked up a couple of boxes this Saturday. He got some thin mints and do-si-dos, which are his favorites, and also got some samoas, which he loathes, but I love.
Last night, I brought my order home. It included thin mints and do-si-dos for my husband, and a box of my daughter’s favorites. My husband wanted to know where the samoas were. I told him that I didn’t buy the cookies for me, I bought them for him. Just like he bought them for me, and isn’t that the way it was supposed to work?
March 12th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
3,300 hours a week does seem a bit much. The only semi-realistic scenario I can see is an extremely masochistic doc review attorney with no wife, no kids, and little to no social life. Or perhaps an attorney with spouse and kids but doesn’t really like them.
–|PW|–
March 12th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Well, she did do M&A at Skadden. That can be massively hours-intensive, but the hours are really just made up hours. I mean, 3,300 is just plain a lie. Sorry. The clients are more or less in on it; they aren’t really fee sensitive in those deals. That’s the only reason firms like Skadden can exist, God bless ‘em. But it’s still padding of pendulous proportion.
March 12th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
I have also worked in a big law firm. I have billed over 2,500 hours and actually cut some time. Your conclusion is without any REAL support.
Also, you cite a journalists story, surely not based on a review of billables, as true…. you should know better than that.
Your opinions are weak and they bore me.
Imagine being so bored you manage to spend time writing a comment. “Opinions” are “weak”? Ok, see ya. Thanks for stopping by. A ton. — RDC
March 13th, 2008 at 12:48 am
I was going to comment that I didn’t think 3300 hours was possible on your first post, but then I thought maybe I didn’t know what I was talking about since I’ve never worked at a big muckety muck firm like Skadden. 3300 hours is only a few hundred hours shy of being TWICE what the firm I worked at during my 2L summer required.
March 13th, 2008 at 6:14 am
Granted, I don’t have extensive experience at BigLaw either, but when I think about some of the things that a high-powered attorney might be doing at the firm — serving on one or two internal committees, mentoring younger associates, networking with other attorneys, prospecting for new clients, and so forth — I have trouble seeing 3,300 hours a year.
–|PW|–
March 13th, 2008 at 8:32 am
In fact it is quite possible to sustain a 2500 hours or so pace for a while. 200+ hours a month without vacation — doable if you have one or two big matters and just chalk up arrival till departure to that one or two billing number.
But each 50 hours after that level really is pretty preposterous.
March 13th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Today, I also pondered how one can bill that many hours per year and still maintain a happy family life. Then, I realized …
–|PW|–
March 15th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Parliment of whores
Ann Althouse says:
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:29 pm
[...] Olbermann been fired?Shoes drop, crows roost, the whole thingChurchill was right about the JewsMine, yours and hoursToo little, too lateThe whole world is a narrow bridgeCheesecake from spaceShoe [...]