Blogconlawprof.

Bloggers who are lawyers and are always blogging about the law are so pretentious. It seems they need to establish their credentials by showing off their "expertise" and "experience" and "research." That obsession strikes me as very lacking in self-knowledge. They must be very insecure. If they were really as accomplished legal thinkers as they pretend, they would talk about interesting things like staples, speed-listening, nostrils, and lint. They would also explain why movies they haven't seen are silly and fake. Another good idea would be for them to start constantly pointing out how their grown-up son thinks his lawprof mommy is the World's Smartest Lawprof and is ever so insightful and clever. Because that isn't creepy or weird at all.

Those pretentious lawbloggers should stop discussing the "law" and instead start endlessly referring to themselves as a "lawprof." They should say things like "lawprofs never listen to other lawprofs about the law" or "lawprofs like to eat baloney sandwiches."

Of course, not all of these lawbloggers are lawprofs. They should merely then find a syllable of their speciality which can be attached to the word "law." As in, "crimlaws think biopics are silly," or "corplaws wonder: do cats in Paris sneeze in French?," or "envirolaws are against their own partisanship." That would be the best thing to do.

My son thinks this is a great idea!

UPDATE: One movie I do like is the original documentary version of "The Manchurian Candidate." It always amazed me, though, how partisans attacked Angela Lansbury's character in that film. Her politics were no good, of course, but her maternal instincts were perfectly admirable. Only partisans would disagree.