Five Things you should know today, October 5, 2012

Rob Eno still silent on why MA GOP Hates American Values (0.00 / 1)

It has been nearly three weeks since it was revealed that the MA GOP Hates American Values and Rob is still silent on the subject.  Obviously Rob knows this is true and that is why he has not commented on it.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 12:35:04 PM UTC

Are you serious (5.00 / 1)

Were you absent all summer?  When I pushed the cause of the Liberty Delegates?  So much so that it's cost me tens of thousands of dollars in business?  Seriously.  

RMG was pretty much an anti-establishment seat the delegates blog for four months.  

Full Disclosure


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

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 12:47:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No I'm not serious, but you obviously are... (0.00 / 0)

Of course I don't expect you to comment on anything I write, even if I directly ask you.  Hell, in the past, I have and you have not responded.  That is why I find it both amusing and an example of your warped value system that you expect David to take you silly bait regarding this non-existent issue.

You really must take David as a fool to help you fan the fumes of one your political farts, so you can stink this race up that much more.  

BTW, Scott Brown is a lawyer to and HE hasn't written or spoken about this issue either.  Why aren't you calling him out and demand that he weigh in on this?  Because you know Brown can't/won't because there is no there there.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 23:20:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, Brown did mention it. (0.00 / 0)

I was surprised.
http://www.wbur.org/2012/10/03...

"So once again, we find out that she's been working not for the little guy, not for the victims, as she said, in the middle class, but for the large corporation as a hired gun, and doing that, quite frankly, without a law license, something that I know is something that should be looked into," Brown told reporters in Winchester Wednesday.

"I know I have to be admitted to the bar," he added. "I took the test, passed the test, and any time you are giving out information, you need to have a license."

Globe too:
http://articles.boston.com/201...

Brown also suggested Wednesday that Warren is improperly practicing law without admittance to the Massachusetts Bar. Until Wednesday, Brown had not addressed that topic directly.

Brown said Warren is "purporting to do that [work] quite frankly without a law license, something I know that quite frankly should be looked into."

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 12:43:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think he meant to say "quite possibly" (0.00 / 0)

Not "quite frankly," since he then says is something that should be looked into. That's true, right Patrick? Shouldn't it be looked into? Maybe it will turn out that she did not break any laws against practicing law without a license, but maybe she did. Why do people stay active on a bar if they can continue to practice law without it? Why didn't she join the Massachusetts bar and get licensed to practice law here, since she was practicing law here for 20 years? She's doesn't want to pay the dues?

---

by: John Howard @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 17:31:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't want to put words in his mouth. (0.00 / 0)

I'm content to use the ones he provided.

Volokh.com is the right place for lawyer questions.  They have a new thread on this:
http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/...

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 17:59:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He said it should be looked in to (0.00 / 0)

That proves he wasn't saying that he is sure that she was practicing without a license, only that it is quite possible that she was, based on the scant evidence we have available.

---

by: John Howard @ Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 02:10:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Either way, I'm surprised his remarks didn't get more play. (0.00 / 0)

As I understand it, this is a very very very serious allegation. Very.

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 18:39:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You mean a serious crime, right? (0.00 / 0)

That's why it's important that it should be looked into. Do we have a record of when she was licensed, and when she was practicing law?

---

by: John Howard @ Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 02:13:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There is the rub. (0.00 / 0)

Of all the people that think it is very very serious, none think it is serious enough to file an official complaint,

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 06:16:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

She was too cheap and entitled to pay her dues (0.00 / 0)

Hopefully she would have been able to pass the Massachusetts bar, right? So the fact she didn't bother to get licensed in Massachusetts just reinforces her sense of entitlement and ivory tower attitude, the laws don't apply to her, the dues don't apply her, the continuing education requirements don't apply to her. It doesn't matter if everyone in Massachusetts lets her off the hook for the crime of practicing law without a license, it is still a serious flaw in her character, again screwing over the unions and regular guys who have to follow the rules.

---

by: John Howard @ Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 18:15:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Brown did metnion it. (0.00 / 0)

And I could publish the email thread from WGBH where David was scheduled to go on with me.  Until the producer decided that the issue would be the main topic on the radio segment that day.  Kravitz then cancelled. Yes that could be a coincidence but I doubt it.

He's purposely ignoring because it is an issue.  Every lawyer save the "Hippy Farmer" who is the bbbo counsel who opined with no facts in front of him thinks so.  


Full Disclosure


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

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 13:04:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who has filed the official action? (0.00 / 0)

anyone?

---
"That it ceased to exist, I'll grant you, but whether or not it failed cannot be definitively said." - Metropolitan (1990)

---

by: Patrick @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 13:06:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't know or care why David canceled... (0.00 / 0)

...but if he were told they they wanted to discuss questions about Obama's citizenship, I hope David would cancel that also.  Because that is the level in which this invented issue you are pushing is at.  Right-wing drool that gets repeated enough that media outlets get attracted by the shiny object.   I have no idea why David canceled, but it may very well be that he did not want to help you give legitimacy to a illegitimate issue.  If so, good for him.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 13:15:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And I could publish the email thread from WGBH where David was scheduled to go on with me. - EaBo (0.00 / 0)

Dude show us the email chain?  I'd love to see it!  Oh man ... seeing David back out of a man to man debate ... I have to see that.  I have to see it with my own eyes.  


Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 13:52:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lawyers know when to withdraw from the conversation (0.00 / 0)

Its when they are wrong, and their opponent is right. That's why he bans the subject of conception rights of marriage and same-sex procreation from BMG, he knows it's a valid objection to same-sex marriage, so he just shuts up. I've seen it time and time again from all the lawyers, they just shut up and try to ride out the storm. All the time they waste is billable, but it harms families and wastes resources, it's tragic they don't just admit what they know and let us move on. Their prevarications are causing real lasting damage to everyone.

---

by: John Howard @ Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 02:21:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

For those of you new to RedMassGroup .... meet Simple J Malarkey he's a bit of a fool. (4.75 / 4)

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 13:09:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey Simple: (0.00 / 0)

You don't really warrant a response but for anyone who might be new here, your comment couldn't be further from what Eno stands for, so in the interests of those NOT familiar with Eno or this site:  Simple's comment is so far off the wall and off base, he is clearly a troll.

I'm all for seeing him blocked as he has NOTHING to lend to this site, and comments like this just serve to derail us from the important business of educating people in an effort to save our country from wackos of the same ilk as Simple.

---

by: Term Limits @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 17:22:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You apparently are one of those America hating MA GOPers... (0.00 / 0)

...wanting to censor my speech in a political forum.  Hell, for all the shortcomings of Rob Eno, even he has a sense of civic responsibility to allow my basic right of free speech.  He even recognizes that I indeed have SOMETHING to lend this site, and occasionally front pages.  

Clearly you have the political maturity of a child, who reads something they don't agree with and doesn't want to read something like that again, so you call for censorship.  While I can not suggest the same, it is obvious that you provide even less value than you accuse me of.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 13:04:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Item #4 (0.00 / 0)

Tisei is very lucky I don't live in that district. Pro-choice is pro-abortion, d'uh.  

---

by: LynneF @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 12:49:07 PM UTC

#4 Just following Tisei Messaging points (0.00 / 0)

For those of you - edfactor especially- who thinks I'm harping on Tisei. I'm just following his messaging points.  Here is his press release touting his pro-abortion views sent out yesterday.  Its what the campaign has chosen to talk about.

MORE DECEIT FROM A SHAMELESS CONGRESSMAN...

(Lynnfield, MA) -- John Tierney's campaign released a new ad today that's, yet again, full of deceit.  The fictional ad portrays Congressional candidate Richard Tisei as opposed to abortion rights and as a cross between Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh.  Tierney's ad is below, as well as a relevant portion from the Tisei interview with ABC's Janet Wu - a segment then blatantly distorted by Tierney in his new ad.

"Does Congressman Tierney have no shame?  He's beginning to embarrass himself with these absurd lies," said Tisei's campaign manager, Paul Moore.  "Richard has a long record as a pro-choice Senator.  He's been a leader on women's health issues in the state for years.  He's openly gay and has been a leader as a social moderate and fiscal conservative.  John Tierney has decided that he can't win if he doesn't lie.  That's pretty pitiful and the voters deserve much better."  

In the interview with Wu (the relevant excerpt of which is here and below), Tisei speaks of his pro-choice positions.  Tisei also opposed the national party's platform and wrote to Massachusetts GOP Chairman Bob Maginn to oppose it.  See the Boston Globe's report on that here and below.

"What's really bizarre is how far John Tierney will go to distort the truth.  The truth is that the district is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  So is Richard.  John Tierney may be socially liberal, but he's fiscally reckless," said Moore.  The voters are making their minds up about John Tierney and that's why he's become so willing to throw any bomb to see if it might work.  I have news for Congressman Tierney:  it's not working and it won't work - because you cannot turn lies into truth."

Full Disclosure


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

---

by: Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 12:54:56 PM UTC

The Simple Fool (0.00 / 0)

Rob, why do you even allow such a Simple Fool to take up any of your bandwidth? He has no "right" to post here. He is not protected under the First Amendment here. He doesn't even use a sincere handle (see malarkey: Meaningless talk; nonsense). He's just full of crap and probably just a liberal rabble-rouser. Let him get his own website and he can talk to himself all he wants.

---

by: BobMonty @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 13:58:18 PM UTC

"...probably just a liberal rabble-rouser[?]" (2.50 / 2)

...wow, people can't get anything past you.  Hey Bob welcome to RMG...I notice you been registered for less than 2 months and you're already part of the goose-step crowd demanding expulsion and censorship.  

Yes, I know Rob has every right to do whatever, but the idea of advocating censorship in a private forum that advocates open political discourse, really speaks volumes to your inability to embrace to American values embodied in the Bill of Rights.  

---

by: Simple J. Malarkey @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 13:10:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bob, (0.00 / 0)

meet Simple...formerly Festus Garvey...who made a bet that Martha Coakley would beat Scott Brown...the loser was to never post on RMG again.

Notice Simple's account start date/time.......he's nothing but a dishonorable liar, formerly known a Festus.

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

---

by: ElectricStrawberry @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 21:02:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's been 1 hour and 34 minutes since Simple has been called out ... (0.00 / 0)

as a dishonorable liar, with no response.

Let's have it, Simple.  Did you welch on a bet?  Did you promise not to post again if Brown won, and then just change your name?

---

by: Bravehaht @ Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 22:42:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tierney is an awful man and dishonest; Tisei is firmly pro-choice (5.00 / 1)

I am stunned at the ads that Tierney is running. (I suppose he deserves credit for broadcasting the lies under his own name rather than having some shadowy third-party group do it.)

The idea that Tisei is some sort of extreme conservative, or a Tea Party favorite, or a pro-life guy is nuts.

Tisei is absolutely pro-choice. I also agree that there is a point of pro-choice-ness that really is much worse than just wanting to keep it legal. Regrettably, in our politics, on this issue, the people on the pure side of each position (NARAL on one side, the Catholic Church on the other) tend to slowly pull people toward them. So I think a lot of people don't like abortion, and want it to be legal but rare, but the extreme abortion lunatics won't give you the pro-choice label unless you're enthusiastic about infanticide. On the other side, some pro-life groups don't count you in their camp unless you fight to make it illegal, etc.

HOWEVER, in this state, I find the pro-life groups to be reasonable, and to make compromises. They - the ones I know - are good people who are not fanatic nut-jobs like the pro-abortion crowd here. They take what they can get because - and they are totally right - there is partial credit here.

So.... back to Tisei - at some point he decided he was a pro-choice guy. Whatever. That's his conscience, not mine. But it is clear he wasn't just intent on being pro-choice as a necessary evil - but embraced it a bit more than that. So Rob is correct that he isn't just an innocent bystander or a Republican who is unenthusiastically pro-choice for purely political reasons. In my mind, he's on their side and not my side. So Tierney is wrong about Tisei, because Thank God, NARAL's standard of being pro-choice is not the standard in the mind of any reasonable person.

---

by: edfactor @ Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 16:43:39 PM UTC