What does it look like?

Or this:

Don't sweat it. Starker ain't notable enough either . . . and he too was concerned with equity.

Do you seek notability? Or WikiVanity.

If your heart and soul can pour into the equity issue (unalienability of Social Security "Benefits") then I am little more than a living breathing fact set . . . set to try to sever the role of the IRS as super debt collector on behalf of private lenders that have been guaranteed zero risk. If the "benefits" are treated as largess that may be setoff to cover debt, administratively, long after even a beneficiary of a criminal restitution order could attach the assets of a criminal defendant then how can the Social Security tax really be called a tax? I want to extract an assurance from Uncle Sam that notwithstanding the student loan guarantee issue that my anticipated Social Security "benefits" will not be setoff to cover private debt that today is not collectible under any conceivable private action in state court(s).

If the government sits in the shoes of the private lender then my nightmare of (criminally) pretending that I might be a smart enough to become a lawyer might today be over.

There are examples of law student groups coming to the aid of the defenseless in celebrated causes, and achieving notoriety either for themselves or their causes. I am perfectly content to be the guinea pig. I have sheparded my facts along so that today my immediate concern is whether the IRS will drain my last 400 bucks from my bank.

Someone once noted that financial wealth and political power are interchangeable, tradeable for one another. Am I wealthy or am I poor?

Who else can you think of that has even the slightest chance to burst JP Morgan and Bank of America's visions of sugar plums in their bid benefit from the buyout of Sallie Mae and make out handsomely – largely on the backs of the unalianable rights of the comparatively poorest in the community? Ever since I had read all the Resolution Trust Corporation related cases and sundry Savings & Loan bailout cases – settling on the perversion of the 100 grand guarantee issue that was interpreted to apply at each individual bank in isolation to the others and leveraged by way of pass-through insurance via deposit brokers -- I have been looking for a chance to name (or at least notify, by way of the affirmative use of notice and an opportunity to be heard) Bank of America because no banker needs a hand out as some sort of charity case – particularly any hand out obtained by way of the taxing power of the government. A banker certainly does not need to have their quest to seek monopoly control hurried along in overnight transfers of an unsound financial institution where the government guarantees the value of the assets of the closed institution, which are largely just personal notes pegged to flaky-valued collateral. (A process that will soon be repeated with a vengeance.)

I am on strike. Which no lawyer in their right mind would advise of their client. But still I just want to get on with my life. If you seek notoriety I have a priceless set of facts. BTW, if I had kids a judge could and would surely have used their contempt power to throw me in jail for refusal to honor a court order to pay money consistent with a constructively determined earning capacity. I could not conduct my activism and have kids, at the same time, as these two things would conflict. Who else do you know who does not have kids, and why?

If I were a slave rather than just a debt slave I might be called an uppity ____. Universal nondiscriminatory debt slavery offers greater aggregate rewards than old-styled slavery based on some immutable characteristics, don't you think?