dayman

lol...do you people ever consider just pretending you are on the "other side" and then evaluating the things you say to see if they are not asinine?

It basically said "she won't release every detail of everything she did so we don't know"...then it fixates on the fact that she listed her office *gasp* where she was and cites part of the ethics codes that says not offices in state w/ out going into great detail on all the exceptions.

In fairness neither would anyone else

Even conservatives must admit the charitable deduction edit was hilarious in that 1) w/ out it it would have put him closer to 10 and made him look like a cheat based on 13% comments and 2) he paid more taxes than he had to which by his own words means he isn't qualified to be president hehe EDIT: Btw I don't really care I just think it's funny and anyone who doesn't admit that is just being partisan...that is funny

I agree just discussing. She won't be disciplined by the bar anyway everyone knows that, certainly not before November. This is just a political op-ed. In any event all lawyers fear falling into some ethics trap so ears and eyes light up when this stuff is talked about.

W/ out showing she represented anyone in Mass or in matters of Mass law, and while admitting the ABA is rule isn't really modernized to the internet age, and glossing over the "temporary" provision...it's really just a op-ed piece slanted against her...plain and simple. The fact is at most it's an academic type argument you would find on a professional responsibility essay in law school....he's writing about not having all the info on her practice and even insinuating she wasn't licensed at all for a period of time she was practicing....to read this as "one guy argues there's a chance she could be subject to discipline" is fine but to read this as "she was definitely engaged in the unauthorized practice of law" is foolish.

She's fine she's authorized to participate in the bankruptcy case and did so "temporarily" from her office in Mass....what systematic presence did she have as holding herself out to practice in Mass? I don't see anything in here that shows she was truly setting up shop in Mass and holding herself out that way or handling matters of Mass law...

Any passionate reaction to this story is stupid.

What is your point B-Man? I said it's the kind of story that Fox news often features...which appeals to the traditionalist who feels under attack. It's a non-story of fluff and things that don't matter. I read the story I knwo the specific link here was from some Rhode Island source w/ nothing else to talk about...my point is that this is a stupid story to care about, which it is. But predictably you see the cascade of responses "Oh lord what is the world coming to"..."Oh lord the PC of our society" "Oh my God this is pathetic" etc ... it's just stupid.

This is the kind of story Fox news jumps on and appeals to the "traditionalist" who thinks America is under attack by the left and law. This is a stupid non-story. Who cares about this and why would anyone get worked up? Unless it's just one sign of America being destroyed! hehe...now you have a guy running for state senate on the platform of "I will restore FAther-Daughter dances!"...idiocy

I believe the Ravens officially have a front 3, but I catch your meaning.

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/4155/darrelle-revis CBS Sports' Jason La Canfora reports that the Jets fear Darrelle Revis tore his left ACL in Sunday's OT win over the Dolphins. It would be our fear as well for a non-contact injury. Losing Revis for the rest of the season would be a massive blow to a Jets defense that is constructed around his ability to take away the opposing team's No. 1 receiver. Kyle Wilson, who has struggled mightily in coverage, would take over as the starter across from Antonio Cromartie. Ellis Lankster would be the nickel back. Sep 23 - 6:00 PM

Just got back from "The Master." There Will Be Blood is my favorite movie of all time. I like PTA, but I'm not so sure about this one. It wasn't bad, but it was frustrating. Perhaps a second watch will make it better since I won't have the feeling of wasted potential...but as of right now...while not terrible...this one faltered.

Breaking News Pakistan minister offers $100,000 bounty for death of maker of anti-Islam film - AFP bit.ly/OLAHiH 11 minutes ago from breakingnews.com

Final Edit: Very little of this btw...is IMO partisan...I know some will disagree...but much of these ideas are in fact VASTLY accelerated by reinvestment act (contrary to common right-wing media bashing, left wing giving up, and political cowardice/incompetence...but it's in there)...as well as other things I was talking about like Healthcare IT, APRA-E, etc...we need people that plant orchards not those that operate based on election cycles and cable news (it is true Obama had opportunity like no other but he really DID plant seeds to follow through and many of his campaign promises probably more that any president in history in 4 years)...nothing is to say the debt isn't important...but this cut cut cut and no tax and "free market cures all" won't keep us up front next century (literally NO evidence the anti-gov't philosophy works in the coming century of a globalized economy where everyone is playing the game and things are changing faster than ever...NONE) and I haven't even really got into some of things in the reinvestment act I like even more (and btw this isn't abandoning "capitalism"...it's just doing what smart successful nations are doing in the modern world)....this discussion cuts to the core of why I like Obama more than Romney btw...much more than forcing me to defend the ACA which I don't think is SOOO terrible like others but I don't like all that much (but still don't hate w/ ignorant faax-arguments). These are just a FEW issues why the current GOP IMO (as is) is lost. I certainly hope they hope they reorganize and come back as a resonable alternative but these few issues are concrete examples of why to me...I can never vote for the bloc that is ... imo ... going to sink us. I know Obama will sink us to you all... but these are some examples (not all btw) of why IMO he's more apt to make us stronger than the GOP. It's not just b/c he's cool...it's b/c there are progressives out there who actually look long term w/ a different view....and also btw I know this burns you all to say this but he really does care about the money...and there will be cuts....either way...more than have been on the table before...the question is simply whether there will be taxes.... The bottom line is the technocrat approach to the next century with a balanced approach to our current financial difficulties (capitalizing on our OBVIOUS advantage in the world despite the sky is falling GOP narrative) is the one I want to vote for. It's Obama. And of course...it's about the people that live here...all of them.

1) My position on high speed rail is simply that your position is unrealistic in modern America...as a working unit it isn't for me and you but more so for our kids (assuming you are close to my age...I am probably younger than you) and more likely in mass for our grand-kids. But as I said above....we'll leave that out. It can be more useful in certain locations sooner but we'll not debate this.... 2) The smart grid is the logistical disaster...that is the common sense obvious answer. it takes cooperation for from a bunch of local gov't/organizations all with their own "issues" but if we could operate like China (not that we should) we would be on the same page...b/c it's obvious and worth it 3) Global climate change is...simply put...a problem IMO. Whether you agree w/ the personalities that have come to the front of the movement or various things surrounding it...we must be a leader in combating it. India and China (2.5 billion combined maybe more I'm not sure last I checked it was that) are coal dependent in large part and if we don't lead the way we miss a huge $$$ opportunity for the next century and leave the world to burn. *4)Retrofits pay for themselves plain and simple....and most contractors that do them guarantee the savings. Many owners of huge energy gobbling buildings would be more apt if there were gov't programs to guarantee the loans allowing them to pay them back + interest from energy savings since the costs are high upfront and many are not credit worthy in the current economy. I know you don't live in NY but there are many building in NY that are taking these actions today including the Empire State Building (Google it) and the facts largely show that this is a no-brainer and gov't backed loans would only accelerate savings for everyone. And it's not just gov't backed loans for private sector buildings that are rock solid but also countless public buildings and schools that could lead the way (as the military is doing). ...and btw as far as "jobs' are concerned...nothing beat retrofitting

So leaving out some of the things I find attractive such as long term rail (or even short term efficiency rail improvement) and moving towards green energy and a smarter delivery grid...this fits into your world view how? And I really don't mean to be attacking here but it begs the question raised in previous discussion with you...which basically gets to the point that you have communicated to me that human carbon emissions negative effects on the long term environment is a hoax. And if that is in fact the opinion...then even so...the economics of the nation...plays in how? And we might as well address the retrofit debate which is by far the one I am most passionate about b/c that is a nobrainer as I said earlier and one government should EASILY help facilitate.

The subject matter of Koppel's story and one that O'Reilly was willing to talk about was what you were talking about. That's all I'm saying. Nothing more, nothing less. Since I saw you posting that tonight and I saw that little exchange this week i though I would ask.

Not that it is anything "bold and fresh" or not talked about but have you seen the two interviews with O'Reilly and Koppel? You can find the O'Reilly interview Koppel clip on a google search and the Koppel interviewing O'Reilly clip on "rock center" website...both happened recently...general subject of the "debate" was what you posted above.

A while ago I posted a number of things I felt were noble movement to position us for the next century and you said you agreed with most (or at least some) of them...but might not agree with "my position on how"...do you have the patience/time/energy to address this now? (if not btw...that's fine...even if you continue to post tonight it's not like everyone always wants to get into that sort of discussion at all times so this is not a "call out" or anything like that you can simply say "not now" and no problems w/ me)

Most moderate people, leaning different direction...will agree w/ this. Koppel is on campaign as any O'Reilly viewer know to try and make his point against this....he isn't the first and won't be the last and he won't succeed.

Just to spark my memory (not being facetious here) you are libertarian man, correct?

hehe...well I rarely do not drink during the day then....there...you happy?