Five Things you should know today, September 28, 2012

Gee, why is the local media... (0.00 / 1)

...ignoring a story that has no legs to stand on?  Warren didn't need to be licensed to do the work she did before the Supreme Court, and no amount of whining from you is going to change that fact.  Get over it.

---

by: JohnT001 @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 11:46:35 AM UTC

JOhn (5.00 / 1)

That is bullshit.  YOu must be licensed in at least ONE jurisdiction to work before the Supreme Court. You must also be licensed in the state that you are conducting the work in.

I've talked to numerous lawyers.  That is the case.

You can't practice federally if you don't have a valid state level license.  No obfuscation by you is going to change that.

Riddle me this, why did the lawyer and Blue Mass Group blogger David Kravitz cancel his appearance with me on WGBH, AFTER learning that this was going to be the topic of discussion?

Huh why?  


Full Disclosure


http://www.redmassgroup.com/pr...

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 12:21:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rob (0.00 / 1)

That is utter bullshit, and you know it.  There are many ways in which her briefs could be used in any court without an active license anywhere.  You want the reason this is a non-story?  Because it's a non-story.

---

by: JohnT001 @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 13:11:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gotta agree (5.00 / 2)

unless you got a law degree, this is one issue no one is going to jump into without doing their due diligence first.  The Herald would be all over it if it had teeth.

One lawyer making complaint over at his blog is not controversy make, especially when he keeps trying to argue she practiced law in MA, via the federal courts.  The comments he's allowing over there don't exactly make me think this guy is some beacon of discourse either.

I'd be careful on this stuff until there conclusive proof.  Keep digging, but some of these front posts are making accusations without due diligence, context, or understanding.

Don't open yourself up to that Rob.  

---

by: Ryan @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 14:23:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Now you have done it JohnT001 (2.00 / 2)

There are many ways in which her briefs could be used in any court without an active license anywhere.

Never mention Elizabeth Warren's briefs.  I just can't get the visual out of my head now....

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 15:44:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Riddle me this, why did the lawyer and Blue Mass Group blogger David Kravitz cancel his appearance with me on WGBH" (5.00 / 2)

[Raising Hand] I think I can answer that one EaBo!  

[Clearing Throat] Because he's a pussy? : )


Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 14:34:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I gave you a 5 because you are frikken hilarious! (5.00 / 1)

"Don't let me get away with it. Check me out. Don't be the sucker generation." -Ronald Reagan

www.inBrockton.com

---

by: BrocktonDave @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 15:45:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks BrocktonDave! (5.00 / 2)

What a difference between our editor and the BMG's ...

EaBo keep kicking their ass!

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 17:20:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Typical Rob... (5.00 / 1)

...seeing things that don't exist.  I have no idea why David canceled, but you were on Jim Braude's show recently and on his radio show at least, he said he practice law in MA without a MA license and he has allowed to do so via a simple procedural process that took into consideration him being a member of another state bar.  And Warren was a member of the NJ bar up until a few months ago.
 

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 15:40:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ahem.... (5.00 / 2)

she said she hasn't had a NJ license for "a very very long time."

I presume that means since she left NJ in 1978 and was licensed in Texas......not 2 weeks ago.

...but dishonorable liars need to stick toghether, eh?

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 17:22:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No... (0.00 / 0)

...she said she hadn't practiced in NJ for a very long time, but her license lasped just recently.

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 13:46:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No.... (0.00 / 0)

She said "I've been inactive in the New Jersey bar for a very, very long time....."
"Inactive in the New Jersey Bar" is different than "not practicing in New Jersey."

...but I've gotta hand it to you dishonorable liars...y'all sick together like the last cheerios in a bowl of milk.

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 20:06:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One thing is for sure ... David skipped town! LOL (1.00 / 1)

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 17:33:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just believe what they tell you (5.00 / 1)

And don't look at the primary source demonstrating your utter ignorance.

"You must obtain a certificate of good standing from the presiding judge, clerk, or other authorized official of the highest court of a State, Commonwealth, Territory or Possession, or of the District of Columbia, evidencing the fact that you have been a member of the Bar of such court for at least three
years and are in good standing."

---

by: wavey @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 12:24:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

says who? (5.00 / 1)

How many lawyers do you know? I know dozens, many of them staff members for corporations, their employers. Without exception, they represent only their employers. Despite this, every single one of them is admitted to practice before at least one state bar. Not being in private practice is irrelevant. Parsing the regs to save $190 is stupid, especially for someone making north of $300k to teach a single course. Either she is involved in private practice or she isn't.

https://massbar.org/membership...

They are pretty explicit about law professors NOT in private practice (working for fees)being a separate license class. She has done both. The ironic thing is that nobody ever said she is incompetent. Cheap maybe. Arrogant and entitled, definitely. All she had to do is pay a few hundred bucks and be done with it. I guess we have established why she has such concern for undocumented workers: she IS one.

---

by: agingcynic @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 12:29:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Since when is "lunch" state time? (2.50 / 2)

Last I looked, lunch time was my time...I assume even the state provides employees personal time everyday for lunch.  

Gee, where are Paul F's fingerprints here?  MA Fiscal Alliance gets whacked for crossing the political line as a 501c3 and they file a BS complaint in an attempt to change the subject.  And Rob is the messenger.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 13:33:22 PM UTC

Rob be honest with this jobs killing health care law BS. (2.50 / 2)

Rob, you either agree that we need to lower the overall cost of health care or we keep on the same cost growth curve.  If we continue on this same cost growth curve every budget in America--household budgets, corporate budgets, government budgets, etc--will be consumed by health care costs or insurance premiums.

You're either for growing health care costs or against them--and I assume you are against growing costs.  Where we differ is how to contain costs.  You no doubt believe that unleashing market forces will lower costs, yada, yada, yada.  Fine, the merit of this approach can be debated at another time.  My question to you is: What would the net effect be of "unleashing market forces" as a way to lower costs?  Certainly cutting costs is a market force and a substantial part of health care costs are the people who provide it.  So just as "government mandated" controls will no doubt--was you point out--reduced jobs and (arguably) reduced services. A "market-based" approach will have the same affect.  (You can argue a market approach will have a better outcomes--debatable, but not part of my point--but it will still result in lower costs, ie less jobs and services.

My point is we have to face reality:  16% of our GDP goes to health care costs--twice that of other 1st world countries.  We need to do something, because we can't afford it to be 20% of GDP.  Regardless of how it is done, reducing health care costs as a % of GDP will cost jobs and reduced services.  

This is a policy reality.  But you just want to use it as a political hatchet to beat not only your partisan foes, but your own party leaders that you do not agree with.  

Not only are you an intellectually dishonest person Rob, you're prepared to advance talking points that are really harmful for society (by your framing attempts to reduce costs are "job killers") just to advance your personal grudges (against Jones and Patrick).  This is why I consider you to be unAmerican.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 13:54:58 PM UTC

I have cited this example before on RMG..... (5.00 / 2)

Take a look at the costs of medical care that is not covered by medical insurance and see the net effect of the market forces on the price.  A perfect example is Lasik eye surgery.  The price of the Lasik eye surgery had dropped considerably since its inception and not a penny of it is covered by major health care insurance companies.  So why does the price go down?  Because the Doctors know it is elective surgery and there are competitors that will underprice each other - WITHOUT SACRIFICING QUALITY OF WORK!!!!

Here is evidence:

Take plastic surgery and Lasik eye surgery: Because patients shop around and compare prices, doctors work hard to win their business. They often give customers their cell-phone numbers. Service keeps increasing, but prices don't. "In every other field of medicine, the price is going up faster than consumer prices in general," says John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis. "But the price of Lasik surgery, on average, has gone down by 30 percent."

This shouldn't be a surprise. What holds costs down is patients acting like consumers, looking out for themselves in a competitive market. Providers fight to win business by keeping costs down and quality up.

Yet politicians keep telling us the solution is more insurance. And they mean insurance not just for catastrophic diseases that could bankrupt us but also for routine treatments.

 

We are headed for a 'Fiscal Cliff' and the country just elected a dope whose motto is 'Forward'.  

---

by: Vote3rdpartynow @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 15:57:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

On the (LSM) Media blackout (0.00 / 0)

"NOTE: It has become abundantly clear, through examining the public record, that Elizabeth Warren has illegally practiced law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  What is also becoming increasingly clear, is that she was not actively licensed to practice law ANYWHERE in the United States.  It is only a matter of time before the Main Stream Media has to pick up on this story."

Shirley you jest, Rob. The LameStream Media would never pass up the opportunity to expose the truth.

---

by: BobMonty @ Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 22:05:14 PM UTC

Abundantly Clear? (0.00 / 0)

Yup, another conspiracy to throw in on the pile!

;)

---

by: Ryan @ Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 02:22:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]