Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2902 Oct 24, 2012
The Worlds Biggest Lie wrote:
As soon as I get to your residence I'll present my driver's licence. This isn't about me remember?
What do poofters like yourself enjoy on a October Saturday morning? I'm buying!
If you think I'd ever invite you to my home, you're crazy. Pick a public place.
NOT spoonfed

United States

#2904 Oct 25, 2012
Praxis33 wrote:
<quoted text>
None of Obama's records are sealed, you dolt.
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/obamas-seale...
Bush didn't release his transcripts, they were leaked to the press.
That you truck with Trump means you are an idiot.
Wow
If a fluff piece like that were written about Romney, or Bush,
I'm sure you would beLIEeve every word as fully as you believe every word on that page?

The saddest thing about the left-right B.S. is how readily people on both sides believe whatever is spoon fed them.

Do some generic research on "Voluntarily Surrendering law licenses" for one,
and you will see how absolutely FALSE the statement;
"She could resume the practice of law any time she chooses" is.

Voluntary Surrender is NOT something that can easily, or simply be undone.
Ask any real lawyer,
and you will see that article start to fall apart like a deck of cards.

Or just believe what you are spoon fed.
Voluntary Surrender

United States

#2905 Oct 25, 2012
According to 45 CFR 60.3[Title 45 -Public Welfare Subtitle a-Department of Health and Human Services Subchapter a-General Administration -Part 60 -National Practitioner-Data Bank for Adverse Information on Physicians and Other Health Care Practitioners-Subpart a- General Provisions], voluntary surrender of license means "a surrender made after a notification of investigation or a formal official request by a State licensing authority for a health care practitioner, physician, dentist, or entity to surrender a license."
.
"The definition also includes those instances where a health care practitioner, physician, dentist, or entity voluntarily surrenders a license in exchange for a decision by the licensing authority to cease an investigation or similar proceeding, or in return for not conducting an investigation or proceeding, or in lieu of a disciplinary action."

definitions.uslegal.com/v/voluntary-surrender...
another question

United States

#2906 Oct 25, 2012
Another couple questions would be,
Why would you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, and a decade plus of your life to become a lawyer at the most prestigious schools in the world,
only to give up that status so easily to avoid a thousand dollar renewal fee?

Why would you abandon a Legal Status as a lawyer that could help anyone in any job?
Even as President & First Lady (Bill & Hillary).

Voluntarily Surrendered, Retired, Inactive,
none of it makes sense to save a thousand dollars, that is tax deductible,.and supports the board you worked your life to apply to.

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2907 Oct 25, 2012
another question wrote:
Another couple questions would be,
Why would you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, and a decade plus of your life to become a lawyer at the most prestigious schools in the world,
only to give up that status so easily to avoid a thousand dollar renewal fee?
Why would you abandon a Legal Status as a lawyer that could help anyone in any job?
Even as President & First Lady (Bill & Hillary).
Voluntarily Surrendered, Retired, Inactive,
none of it makes sense to save a thousand dollars, that is tax deductible,.and supports the board you worked your life to apply to.
Goodness, the Internet is full of ignorant fools.

According to the Illinois State Bar, Barack Obama voluntarily retired, and Michelle Obama is voluntarily inactive. They did not lose their licenses, and did not surrender their licenses.

https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp...

According to that website, the differences between Inactive and Retried are as follows:

"Inactive Lawyers who register as inactive must pay an annual fee of $105.00. Inactive status lawyers may not practice law based upon their Illinois license or hold themselves out as being so authorized. An inactive lawyer may resume active status by submitting written or online notification of the intent to do so, and by paying the balance of the fee active lawyers must pay for the registration year in which active status is resumed. Inactive lawyers are also subject to a $25.00 per month late fee if registering late.(To change your status online, please see below.)

Retired Retired lawyers pay no registration fee, and may not practice law based upon their Illinois license or hold themselves out as being so authorized. A retired lawyer may resume active status by submitting written or online notification of the intent to do so, and by paying full active fees for the registration year in question and for every other year in which the lawyer was registered as retired. "
very interesting

United States

#2911 Oct 25, 2012
Praxis33 wrote:
<quoted text>
Goodness, the Internet is full of ignorant fools.
According to the Illinois State Bar, Barack Obama voluntarily retired, and Michelle Obama is voluntarily inactive. They did not lose their licenses, and did not surrender their licenses.
https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp...
According to that website, the differences between Inactive and Retried are as follows:
"Inactive Lawyers who register as inactive must pay an annual fee of $105.00. Inactive status lawyers may not practice law based upon their Illinois license or hold themselves out as being so authorized. An inactive lawyer may resume active status by submitting written or online notification of the intent to do so, and by paying the balance of the fee active lawyers must pay for the registration year in which active status is resumed. Inactive lawyers are also subject to a $25.00 per month late fee if registering late.(To change your status online, please see below.)
Retired Retired lawyers pay no registration fee, and may not practice law based upon their Illinois license or hold themselves out as being so authorized. A retired lawyer may resume active status by submitting written or online notification of the intent to do so, and by paying full active fees for the registration year in question and for every other year in which the lawyer was registered as retired. "
Very interesting and informative!

Since you have been responding rather diligently to this,
and seem to be able to find a steady stream of information on the subject
maybe you can answer one more question.

The info you posted does not mention any requirement for 'continuing education'.
If 'continuing education' was a requirement for the license,
I would expect proof of a completed 'continuing education' course would have to be submitted as well.

Especially since a Continuing Education requirement was one of the reasons people have given for them both to have given up their status as lawyers.

If there is no continuing education requirement,
then the only reason to drop the law license was to save $1000 every 3 years?
While paying $105 a year for it to remain inactive?

Does that REALLY make any sense to anyone?
Mitt da Flip Floppa

Fitchburg, MA

#2912 Oct 25, 2012
The Sentinel endorse Brown the OBSTRUCTIONIST! It is obvious after reading the many pro-Brown articles printed by the Sentinel.

They endorsed Brown who voted against EVERY Pro-American jobs bill that Obama presented. The Sentinel points out Bipartisan votes that Brown voted for as it was OBVIOUS that the obstructionist were not going to OBSTRUCT these bills.

Brown is a flip-flop like Romney. I voted and supported Scott Brown the first time around as Martha Coakley was suspect. Brown has disappointed us all especially herein Fitchburg. As Fitchburg has one of the highest unemployment rates Scott Brown votes against pro-American jobs bills and does not submit a jobs bill himself!!!!!

Not only have these Obstructionist Republicans voted AGAINST pro-American jobs bills presented by Obama but they HAVEN'T presented ANY JOBS BILLS FOR PASSAGE!!!!!!! This is the worst DO NOTHING CONGRESS in the history of the US.

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2913 Oct 25, 2012
very interesting wrote:
<quoted text>
Very interesting and informative!
Since you have been responding rather diligently to this,
and seem to be able to find a steady stream of information on the subject
maybe you can answer one more question.
The info you posted does not mention any requirement for 'continuing education'.
If 'continuing education' was a requirement for the license,
I would expect proof of a completed 'continuing education' course would have to be submitted as well.
Especially since a Continuing Education requirement was one of the reasons people have given for them both to have given up their status as lawyers.
If there is no continuing education requirement,
then the only reason to drop the law license was to save $1000 every 3 years?
While paying $105 a year for it to remain inactive?
Does that REALLY make any sense to anyone?
I don't know whether Illinois has any CLE requirements, but why don't you look it up yourself instead of believing this nonsense sight unseen?
very interesting

United States

#2914 Oct 25, 2012
Since this is a thread on State Senator,
I think it is worth noting as a Massachusetts Resident Elizabeth Warren practiced law in Massachusetts with her New Jersey and Texas Licences, and has NEVER been a member off the Mass Bar Association.

She did this by virtue of a statute that allows OUT OF STATE RESIDENTS to practice Federal law in states where they do not hold a law license.

As a Massachusetts resident, this was very improper.

The New Jersey and Texas Bar Associations WILL NOT be investigating thus though,

she had let her Texas License lapse years ago,
and VOLUNTARILY RESIGNED her New Jersey licence last month on September 11 2012.

Shortly after the above impropriety was made public!
very interesting

United States

#2915 Oct 25, 2012
Praxis33 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know whether Illinois has any CLE requirements, but why don't you look it up yourself instead of believing this nonsense sight unseen?
I was merely hoping to tap in to the vast wealth of information you seem to have, that you use to shoot down posts you disagree with.

Is it just that your cut and paste skills are incapable of actual research?

Or is it that you KNOW there is no Continuing Education requirement for Chicago.

And the only possible reason to suspend her own license is to save $228 a year.

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2916 Oct 25, 2012
very interesting wrote:
Since this is a thread on State Senator,
I think it is worth noting as a Massachusetts Resident Elizabeth Warren practiced law in Massachusetts with her New Jersey and Texas Licences, and has NEVER been a member off the Mass Bar Association.
She did this by virtue of a statute that allows OUT OF STATE RESIDENTS to practice Federal law in states where they do not hold a law license.
As a Massachusetts resident, this was very improper.
The New Jersey and Texas Bar Associations WILL NOT be investigating thus though,
she had let her Texas License lapse years ago,
and VOLUNTARILY RESIGNED her New Jersey licence last month on September 11 2012.
Shortly after the above impropriety was made public!
And, Scott Brown's law license is inactive in MA too! What a scandal!
very interesting

United States

#2917 Oct 25, 2012
Mitt da Flip Floppa wrote:
The Sentinel endorse Brown the OBSTRUCTIONIST! It is obvious after reading the many pro-Brown articles printed by the Sentinel.
They endorsed Brown who voted against EVERY Pro-American jobs bill that Obama presented. The Sentinel points out Bipartisan votes that Brown voted for as it was OBVIOUS that the obstructionist were not going to OBSTRUCT these bills.
Brown is a flip-flop like Romney. I voted and supported Scott Brown the first time around as Martha Coakley was suspect. Brown has disappointed us all especially herein Fitchburg. As Fitchburg has one of the highest unemployment rates Scott Brown votes against pro-American jobs bills and does not submit a jobs bill himself!!!!!
Not only have these Obstructionist Republicans voted AGAINST pro-American jobs bills presented by Obama but they HAVEN'T presented ANY JOBS BILLS FOR PASSAGE!!!!!!! This is the worst DO NOTHING CONGRESS in the history of the US.
Did any Democrats vote against these same jobs bills?

If John Kerry voted against them would you also vote against him?
very interesting

United States

#2918 Oct 25, 2012
Interesting presidential quote today.

Rolling Stone cover,“Obama and the Road Ahead: The Rolling Stone Interview,” by Douglas Brinkley:“We arrived at the Oval Office for our 45-minute interview … on the morning of October 11th.… As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president.…[S]he said,‘Tell him: You can do it.’ Obama grinned.…‘You know, kids have good instincts,’ Obama offered.‘They look at the other guy and say,“Well, that’s a bullshitter, I can tell.”’”
very interesting

United States

#2919 Oct 25, 2012
Praxis33 wrote:
<quoted text>
And, Scott Brown's law license is inactive in MA too! What a scandal!
Politicians generally find it very difficult to stay in check with the Bar Associations Ethic Boards,
so if Scott Brown had a law license in Mass,
and if it was inactivated,

I would find that just as interesting as I do Elizabeth Warren's, and the Obama's status'.

Do you have any other info on THIS subject?

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2921 Oct 25, 2012
very interesting wrote:
<quoted text>
Politicians generally find it very difficult to stay in check with the Bar Associations Ethic Boards,
so if Scott Brown had a law license in Mass,
and if it was inactivated,
I would find that just as interesting as I do Elizabeth Warren's, and the Obama's status'.
Do you have any other info on THIS subject?
Scott Brown's law license is inactive. Look it up yourself.
while looking up Scott B

United States

#2923 Oct 25, 2012
I found this part of the Mass bar pretty interesting;

Resignation. There are two ways to resign from the practice of in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
First, lawyers under investigation for misconduct may submit a disciplinary resignation under Supreme Judicial
Court Rule 4:01, Section 15. Second, if you are in good standing and you wish to resign voluntarily from the bar, the
General Counsel will place your request before the Board, which will make a recommendation to the Court. It is the Board's
practice to hold such requests for six months in case disciplinary charges surface. This kind of resignation will also have
the effect of removing your name from the rolls and would likely require you to take and pass the bar examination and fulfill
other requirements for readmission should you decide to return to the practice of law in Massachusetts.
> Alternatively, you may elect Retirement Status, for which you do not pay an annual fee, in the event you deem
it unlikely you would be practicing law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the future. You obtain the
same result without all the negative effects of an actual resignation from the bar. If you wish to resume
active status from retirement, however, you are required to pay the active fee for all the years while on retirement status.

http://massbbo.org/

Anyone taking the first option would have to retake the Bar Exam!!!
Hardly the 'simple procedure' posted for Chicago

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2924 Oct 25, 2012
while looking up Scott B wrote:
I found this part of the Mass bar pretty interesting;
Resignation. There are two ways to resign from the practice of in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
First, lawyers under investigation for misconduct may submit a disciplinary resignation under Supreme Judicial
Court Rule 4:01, Section 15. Second, if you are in good standing and you wish to resign voluntarily from the bar, the
General Counsel will place your request before the Board, which will make a recommendation to the Court. It is the Board's
practice to hold such requests for six months in case disciplinary charges surface. This kind of resignation will also have
the effect of removing your name from the rolls and would likely require you to take and pass the bar examination and fulfill
other requirements for readmission should you decide to return to the practice of law in Massachusetts.
> Alternatively, you may elect Retirement Status, for which you do not pay an annual fee, in the event you deem
it unlikely you would be practicing law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the future. You obtain the
same result without all the negative effects of an actual resignation from the bar. If you wish to resume
active status from retirement, however, you are required to pay the active fee for all the years while on retirement status.
http://massbbo.org/
Anyone taking the first option would have to retake the Bar Exam!!!
Hardly the 'simple procedure' posted for Chicago
How is any of this relevant to a choice between Warren and Brown?
thank you for the laffs

United States

#2925 Oct 25, 2012
Praxis33 wrote:
<quoted text> How is any of this relevant to a choice between Warren and Brown?
This is some of your best material yet Prax!

If we removed all posts irrelevant to this election,
the post you quoted has a much better chance of remaining here than anything you have posted.

YOU are the one who claimed Scott Brown was a member of the Mass Bar,
and has since given up his license, remember?

And without any link, source, or substance.

My response was in that vein.

Try to follow along.
Mitt da Flip Floppa

Fitchburg, MA

#2926 Oct 25, 2012
I am pledging to bring ten registered voters personally that do not normally vote to the voting booth. I extend this challenge to all Elizabeth Warren supporters.

It is time to stand up America and to participate as we have a Corporate Vulture in Romney trying to take over the whitehouse. A man who made his millions by outsourcing American jobs to China and India.

Brown is a Republican pawn. Elizabeth Warren will lead Massachusetts with high regard,respect and dignity!

The Sentinel endorsed these two as their editors are current Republican strategist! Control over our newspapers is destructive to our Democracy!

Our country is on the right track,we would have been further ahead if the OBSTRUCTIONIST Republicans were not in control of Congress! Vote them out!!!

Praxis33

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#2927 Oct 25, 2012
thank you for the laffs wrote:
<quoted text>
This is some of your best material yet Prax!
If we removed all posts irrelevant to this election,
the post you quoted has a much better chance of remaining here than anything you have posted.
YOU are the one who claimed Scott Brown was a member of the Mass Bar,
and has since given up his license, remember?
And without any link, source, or substance.
My response was in that vein.
Try to follow along.
Here you go:

http://massbbo.org/bbolookup.php...

His license is inactive. And, he's going to lose to Warren.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Fitchburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Lynch EPOCA Fraud 6 hr Marty kirkorian 2
Turtleboy sports will be having a new approach ... (Aug '16) 8 hr Mhmyah 40
Open letter to Sentinel and Enterprise 9 hr Pork City Lynch 50
Lynch has been found in Worcester 21 hr Frank Rizzo 3
fleitas will run on stickers in november (Sep '15) Thu Pablo 13
Fitchburgs corruption being exposed (Feb '16) Mar 21 The 12th Doctor 404
News This show won't be a drag Mar 19 FSU 3

Fitchburg Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Fitchburg Mortgages