patrick.net

elliemae says

It's an opinion piece. Quoting it as fact is just plain dumb.

It is both - fact (Michelle went inactive in '94, Barack in Jan 08), and an opinion explaining this fact - Prof. North throws out an idea, and gets confirmation from people in the know - yes, going inactive is generally used to avoid public record of something not pleasant.

elliemae says

Inactive means they didn't continue to pay and receive CEU's.

Continue to pay what? Few hundred bucks out of combined $500K+ incomes? Aren't you spending way too much time on this silly argument?

CEU's hard seats? What about years and (hundred of) thousands for Harvard education? What about months of studying for a Bar?

Doesn't seem plausible to me... But here comes Bob! Oh no!
more of the same arguments, now he got his Wife with medical license who is out of country! Did Michelle go out of country in '94, or did Barack move it in '08? Nope! Below is the letter describing why it's NOT a good idea to go inactive. Keep on reading.

Bob is still arguing around the fact that no complaints or disbarment or record is issued against INACTIVE Licenses! When storm is brewing, quietly go inactive and issue(s) is(are) dropped! No formal complaints follow... Nothing...

Back to Prof. North: "Remember, he was a United States Senator at the time. How many United States Senators have voluntarily retired from the practice of law and turned in their licenses? Only one"

Only One! Oh, and here Bob, letter to Prof. North from an attorney, confirming his suspicion:

http://www.garynorth.com/public/10046.cfm

"... A grievance can be filed by pretty much anyone, but grievances are confidential because of the potential to damage an attorney's reputation - even when there is no basis for the grievance. Going public with the filing of a grievance is a violation of the accused attorney's confidentiality - and is thus a disciplinary infraction on its own. ONLY after a probable cause panel has determined that there is probable cause to proceed and file a complaint with disciplinary counsel is the complaint (filed by the panel) a matter of public record..."

Grievances are CONFIDENTIAL and filing grievance is a VIOLATION. ONLY AFTER probably cause is established, complaint is filed.

Timeline: Michelle gets grievance, goes inactive before probably cause panel review, and the issue goes away.

Back to the letter:
"... Another Judge in our area was under heavy investigation. Disciplinary Counsel showed up at his office, took 100 files and his assistant's computer. About 10 days later, the Judge resigned for "health reasons". He is listed on the Supreme Court website as "permanently retired". He surrendered all licenses, but his record shows no discipline and no surrender of licenses. The general public knows nothing about what was going on that led to the visit by disciplinary counsel, even though the local bar associations do.

A physician client of mine has 3 licenses - one of which is in a state 800 miles away in which he hasn't practiced for 25 years. He keeps the licenses and pays the fees because giving up his license would look bad on his applications to the other 2 states. It would imply that he had done something wrong. It's not just lawyers who take that approach."

Cliff notes: if panel starts investigation, it's a good idea to "retire" for some reasons - health, or because you don't want to pay, or continue education, etc...

Consider this, back in 1994 Barack wasn't president, and Michelle's law degree and license was a big deal. They are not that rich to just toss it. Yet she goes "inactive".

Sad but unsurprising to see that a thread about trolls is being hijacked by an anti-Obama troll.

AlexS says

CEU's hard seats? What about years and (hundred of) thousands for Harvard education? What about months of studying for a Bar?

The education and bar admission are not lost, merely inactive. If you are admitted to the bar and then choose inactive status, you retain the right re-activate at will. Inactive means only that (a) you don't have to pay active dues and (b) you don't have to waste time on Mandatory Continuing Legal Education. If you are not actively practicing law, i.e. offering legal services to clients, there is no need to remain on active status. Bar admission is a function of state law, some states don't have inactive status, others exempt certain people (e.g. judges) from MCLE. Conversely, going inactive is not a defense to a disciplinary action, which would continue regardless.

CL says

Do you understand the purpose of Continuing Education?

The purpose of Mandatory Continuing Education is to make $ for the industry that provides it. The most conspicuous example is in the medical-industrial complex, where doctors are required to attend and pay for PhRMA infomercials called "Continuing Medical Education" (CME). Eventually the doctors figure out that if they prescribe profitably enough, the drug companies will pay for their CME in Hawaii, which is one of the ways PhRMA controls the medical profession. In law, MCLE is similar, sponsored by the largest operators; big firms are exempt from paying for MCLE because they have political influence and are "allowed" to provide MCLE in-house to their associates at no cost. If it were worthwhile, they wouldn't need to make it mandatory.

curious2 says

If you are admitted to the bar and then choose inactive status, you retain the right re-activate at will.

AlexS says

He keeps the licenses and pays the fees because giving up his license would look bad on his applications to the other 2 states. It would imply that he had done something wrong. It's not just lawyers who take that approach."

AlexS says

giving up his license would look bad

I don't know why you would quote yourself as an appeal to authority, but in any event you're mistaken here. Going inactive does not look bad and it certainly does not mean giving up a license. To the contrary, it means keeping the license, like putting it on a shelf. Do you own any clothes that you aren't wearing right now? You probably keep them in a drawer, but you haven't lost them or given them away. You still have them, they are merely inactive.

david1 wrote that a majority of the trolls are conservatives, but misunderstood that as bias. In fact, it results from the fact that the sample is unrepresentative. Users of P.net are people who can read and write and have access to the Internet. Such people have access to facts, which makes most of them less vulnerable to Faux news. A lot of what people call "conservative" isn't really conservative, nor is it liberal in the sense that the founders understood that term; it is instead retrograde, based on repeating something a preacher or divide-and-misrule politician said without reference to facts of any kind.

HydroCarbon,

When we run out of hydrocarbons we will have cannibal anarchy.

curious2 says

I don't know why you would quote yourself as an appeal to authority, but in any event you're mistaken here.

If you had reading capabilities you would've noticed I was quoting a letter from attorney to prof North. But you don't, so you haven't.

TrollBeGone(tm), "Apply Directly to the Troll."

AlexS says

If you had reading capabilities...But you don't

Obviously we are both capable of reading, we've quoted each other. Your endless need for attention would be better satisfied by doing something useful rather than trolling. On the other hand, there is much to be said for the advice, "do not feed the troll," so having refuted your "arguments" I am going to stop feeding you now.

Curious2, only in your curious imagination does typing "so having refuted your arguments" - is refuting the arguments...

Nevertheless, I'm hearing the flush, and curious2 proudly coming out of bathroom.

CaptainShuddup says

I'm not a right winger. I just don't tow the Liberal line and jump in and sing a few bars of kumbya while Obama drives us all to Hell.

I just like to come here and vent about how the politics of this country effects me. But it seems you can't do that, unless you agree with the Left political views 100% in this country.

And now since I can't even post any threads, I just found that out by trying. The usefulness of this site has expired. So long patneters, it's been fun.

Some of you may have known me as...

Tenpoundbass
Tenouncetrout
TPB
DONE
The GOP
and now this is Captain Shuddup signing off for good.

So long everybody.

A TROLL of TROLLS!! in massive denial.

One of "THE" most repulsive characters I've had the unfortunate experience to read on Patnet.

oh and CRY ME A BLOODY RIVER! boo hoo, don't cry.

People have APOCALYPSEFUCK on ignore!? I don't think I'd still be watching this site if it weren't for him (or her, for all I know)

AlexS:
I allowed my state licenses to go inactive when I chose to practice in another state. That's my own decision - it had nothing to do with complaints against me (none) or disciplinary actions pending (none); it had everything to do with the fact that I just didn't fucking feel like keeping it active.

The Obamas can activate their licenses at will - there are many people who make the same choice. Only a conspiracy theorist would choose to believe some college professor's supposition that there are some phantom reasons to allow a license to lapse or become inactive.

If they're not practicing law, why bother with the license? They have sufficient $$$ to live on without lawyering.

Now, if they chose to denounce their education and surrender their college degrees - well, you might have something there, cupcake.

CL says

AlexS says

Michelle Obama lost her law license in 1994. Official story - she just let it become "inactive". However, that's not how it works - you don't just go through years/expense in law school just to let it "inactivate".

Problem is, you don't know law or any other professional certification, obviously.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/

I know people in every Professional field that let their certs go inactive. That's the problem with your insistence on using your experience to judge reality, and by reading so much fishwrap on the interwebs.

You know, sometimes I wonder if letting my Microsoft Windows for Workgroup 3.11 certification expire was really the right thing to do. I mean some people really value their conventional memory and these newfangled systems, what are they good for??? Just more viruses than you can shake a stick at. In the old days when people got a PC virus, all I had to do was to whip out a bunch of floppy discs, blow on discs a little and an eight hour install later, the system would be as good as new! So what if you couldn't play Commander Keen for a day? At least the dang virus didn't steal your bank account information or upload all that porn to your computer! Miss the old days.

AlexS says

yes, going inactive is generally used to avoid public record of something not pleasant.

Everyone is still waiting for you to provide some proof of this. Still waiting, still waiting, still waiting.

AlexS says

Bob is still arguing around the fact that no complaints or disbarment or record is issued against INACTIVE Licenses! When storm is brewing, quietly go inactive and issue(s) is(are) dropped! No formal complaints follow... Nothing...

You aren't the sharpest knive in the drawer are you. The Illinios bar says it not possible. Where in the statute does it say you can't make a complaint against an inactive license? You did read it didn't you? I did.

AlexS says

Grievances are CONFIDENTIAL and filing grievance is a VIOLATION. ONLY AFTER probably cause is established, complaint is file

A big no shit sherlock holmes moment for you. If there is no probable cause there is action taken. No kidding, you just figured that out, great, you are moving right along. Again where does it say you can't bring a complaint or have a violation against an inactive license. Let us know when you have an answer. Still waiting, still waiting, still waiting. You can't because it's not there. The only exception is under rule 757 and 758 lawyers on inactive status because of disablity have violations stayed (not cancelled, just held) until the disability is cleared. That would be physical or incapacitating mental disability. Public record again.

groundhogdaze says

You know, sometimes I wonder if letting my Microsoft Windows for Workgroup 3.11 certification expire was really the right thing to do.

robertoaribas says

I was debating putting my real estate license into inactive status this year... or maybe in a couple more years... I've never had a complaint action.

Both of you probably have something to hide - altho I'm not sure what could be worse than being a realtor in the first place...

Damn! I didn't make it to the top ten. I need to be more offensive. lol

I wonder how many are trolls and how many really believe what they write...

curious2 says

david1 wrote that a majority of the trolls are conservatives, but misunderstood that as bias. In fact, it results from the fact that the sample is unrepresentative.

Disagree. An unrepresentative sample is selection bias by definition. The bias exists because this is a left leaning blog. Given a majority of the READERS of posts on this forum are likely to disagree with ideas and posts that lean right of center, the fact that the most "disliked" posters are right leaning is not surprising.

But it is not an indication of the overall "trollishness" of the poster himself.

It is more probably a function of the number of posts made and the degree right of center the poster happens to be.

The title of this thread is "Top Trolls" - I was merely pointing out that "most disliked" is not an indication of trollishness..

The "dislike" button as used on this blog is the epitome of an ad hominem attack, albeit a lazy one.

Politifact says

A TROLL of TROLLS!! in massive denial.

One of "THE" most repulsive characters I've had the unfortunate experience to read on Patnet.

oh and CRY ME A BLOODY RIVER! boo hoo, don't cry.

I had a nice talk with Angie Holan today. You're not even authorized to use their moniker to bully and troll internet forums. Not that she's aware of.

That makes you a liability to Potifact.com and Tampa Bay Times, a FACT that I reminder her of.

groundhogdaze says

You know, sometimes I wonder if letting my Microsoft Windows for Workgroup 3.11 certification expire was really the right thing to do.

This is the only way you can argue, mixing apples and oranges. Technologies get outdated fast and IT certifications are voluntary.

But here is my general observations of how liberals argue - bring up irrelevant points, twist words and facts, but - most importantly - start childish name calling, and insult anyone who states things they don't like.

cliff notes: simple facts - michelle went inactive in 1994, barack in jan. 2008. Barack is THE ONLY senator with license to practice law who went inactive. Professor North, who is not particularly right winging obama-marxist calling - asks questions, why that would happen, and shares interesting letters from other practicing attorney(s) confirming his suspicions - Obamas were avoiding public record of something.

Reaction from Liberals on this board? Smear, name calling, mixing and repeating over useless, irrelevant facts (IT certifications, Real Estate licenses, out of country and out of state situations, and on and on and on).

Arguing like little crying babies. wah waah waaah waaah wah waah waaah waaah!

North is actually very level-headed concerning Obama and considers him just a left wing social climber with wife who loves to shop. North even had an article recently, stating in fact that Obama is no more Marxist than Romney - both believe in the same Marxist principles (example: central bank & government control of money and credit), while not believing in other Marxist principles.

Obamas are working hard at doing precisely what their puppet masters are telling them. This way after office Obama will be paid $100K per speech - their only source of income after presidency, since they don't have businesses and their law licenses are "inactive". Precedent - Bubba Clinton.

If Obamas could "re-activate" their law licenses - as some here suggest - they wouldn't need to fullfil orders from their masters so hard.

So, here is my prediction - Obamas will never re-activate their law licenses.

Let's revisit this topic in 5-10 years, or as soon as I am proven wrong.

robertoaribas says

I was debating putting my real estate license into inactive status this year... or maybe in a couple more years... I've never had a complaint action.

Haha that's like letting ur Kiss Army membership expire :)

AlexS says

So, here is my prediction - Obamas will never re-activate their law licenses.

Let's revisit this topic in 5-10 years, or as soon as I am proven wrong.

If you promise to shut up about it until then, sure I'll agree

I'm amazed at the amount of time that adults invest into something so beyond trivial.

Are the people that feed the trolls, any less to blame then those that do the so called trolling in the first place? I don't need an ignore button or a troll meter, i trust my internal gauges to decipher between that which is good information and that which is bad.

bdrasin says

shut up about it

Oh, the beauty, the niceness of liberal arguing, the tolerance shown to the opposing views...

bob2356 says

Everyone is still waiting for you to provide some proof of this. Still waiting, still waiting, still waiting.

Who is everyone? Are you - everyone? Since when? What are you=everyone waiting for? Why don't you=everyone go and try to find public record of grievences against laywers - before they made or passed it through the panel and publish on here. Until youEveryone do - keep on waiting. These records aren't allowed, and don't exist, you EVERYONE you.

bob2356 says

You aren't the sharpest knive in the drawer are you. The Illinios bar says it not possible. Where in the statute does it say you can't make a complaint against an inactive license? You did read it didn't you? I did.

One of us is not the sharpest knive in the drawer - but it is definitely not me. Timeline: complaint against active obama, obama goes inactive, complaint doesn't go to the panel. But sure, you can complain against active or inactive all you want.

EveryoneBob, plz learn how to absorb what you read and use arguments, instead of completely not comprehending what others are saying, jumping to conclusions, name calling and smearing.

I'm voting for Romney but I love to smoke weed and have a good time
I think Obama has proven he's not a leader but I love one of his favorite places to eat breakfast in town http://www.valoisrestaurant.com/Specials.htm

I was born and raised in one of the most concentrated areas of Democrats in the nation. Chicago IL/Cook County

Got nothing but love for my Liberal friends.. It's really never been a big deal
BTW They hate Rahm now for some reason and I think he's doing a good job.

HEY YOU says

Damn! I didn't make it to the top ten. I need to be more offensive. lol

If you're not being disliked or ignore by at least a few people, you aren't talking about deep and controversial issues. And isn't that the whole point of Internet forums? You can debate ideas that you really can't with coworkers and neighbors.

I've never done weed. What's it like?

I've heard stories of people getting paranoid and calling the cops on themselves. Doesn't sound like fun! ;-)

freak80 says

I've never done weed. What's it like?

I've heard stories of people getting paranoid and calling the cops on themselves. Doesn't sound like fun! ;-)

With today's potent cannabis I would say those stories are probably true.

I'm sure everybody's experience varies but with me it's purely recreational . I get really interested in conversation, TV or music initially then I get hungry then I go to bed. So did that description make you ready to come to the dark side ? haha

AlexS says

going inactive is generally used to avoid public record

AlexS says

These records aren't allowed, and don't exist,

If the records don''t exist then how do you "know" this to be "fact". Your sKool obviously didn't include any curriculum on logic problems.

AlexS says

Timeline: complaint against active obama, obama goes inactive, complaint doesn't go to the panel.

Other than the fact Illinois statute simply doesn't allow this, a problem with your theory which you keep ignoring, if the records don't exist then how do you know this? Where are you getting your information from, divinity perhaps? Was your sKool jesuit?

This is like pulling wings off a fly. Maybe you should get some more sKooling that includes logic.

Freedom of speech is only for some.

freak80 says

I've never done weed. What's it like?

It's awesome - like drinking, only without the loss of motor control, and a happy buzz. You've heard about the exceptions. I highly recommend it.

Patrick, is there another list for non-trolls, people who get lots of likes?

elliemae says

freak80 says

I've never done weed. What's it like?

It's awesome - like drinking, only without the loss of motor control, and a happy buzz. You've heard about the exceptions. I highly recommend it.

Eschew Obfuscation

I never liked it, although most of my friends did. Just made me feel nervous, jumpy, paranoid and trembly. Never really got that "happy" feeling. I really tried to like it, but after several years of occasional use, I finally realized I wasn't actually enjoying the experience. It doesn't necessarily float everyone's boat.

Alex - we get it - you don't like the Obamas and are trying to find a conspiracy just because they don't do what everyone else does.

If Obama did what everyone else did, he wouldn't have become the first black president. And if he wanted to practice law, he'd get his license back.

They are now wealthy, and will never have to practice again. Why would they continue to keep thier licenses active if they never have to walk into a law office again?

AlexS says

IT certifications are voluntary.

So are licenses to practice law.

elliemae says

Why would they continue to keep thier licenses active if they never have to walk into a law office again?

Ellie you are such a killjoy for pointing out the obvious when there are so many grandiose conspiracies to be imagined.

robertoaribas says

Maybe I'm a hobgobblin then, instead of a troll... I'll ask my mom about my family lineage...

I think it is what I said earlier in the week. You make intellectual arguments personal. When someone disagrees with you, you attack them. Takes away from your points and the thread.

curious2 says

AF=Shostakovich is brilliant, 22 users don't know what they're missing.

I didn't get it when I first started reading here. Now I love it.

elliemae says

It's awesome - like drinking, only without the loss of motor control, and a happy buzz. You've heard about the exceptions. I highly recommend it.

This is not at all my experience.

Homeboy says

I never liked it, although most of my friends did. Just made me feel nervous, jumpy, paranoid and trembly. Never really got that "happy" feeling. I really tried to like it, but after several years of occasional use, I finally realized I wasn't actually enjoying the experience. It doesn't necessarily float everyone's boat.

This is my experience. Anxiety and disphoria. DISLIKE>

bg says

like drinking, only without the loss of motor control, and a happy buzz.

I definitely get a happy buzz from drinking if I hit just the right level, about 3 drinks. Too much and I'll regret it later, too little and I won't even notice it. I can believe that there is actually some Irish genetic component to that feeling.

Haven't tried marijuana since college, except for one disastrous experience in Amsterdam. Hadn't realized how much stronger the stuff has gotten. Maybe it will be something fun to do in my old age.