29 Sep

Does Integrity And Honesty Matter In The Senate?

                                       

Does it make sense to elect a compromised candidate to the Senate?

Elizabeth Warren the Marxist sounding law professor of Harvard is running for the Senate, but the Senate is probably running from her. Positions of power offer many opportunities for corruption and it is extremely hard for an honest man to resist the temptation. Bringing in a corrupt lawyer who already is compromised in terms of honesty and integrity is a forlorn hope at reestablishing the reputation of the Senate. Will the Senate be jaded enough to accept a new member who has already displayed a lack of integrity, but is willing to break the law at will.

Elizabeth Warren has based her campaign on a mythical premise of intellect and integrity; based on that fact alone, it is remarkable her campaign hasn’t collapsed.

Ms Warren is adept at throwing out Marxist clichés, but she is running for Massachusetts.

YouTube Preview Image

Nearly everyone is familiar with her use of unsubstantiated minority status for preferential treatment in gaining a teaching position at Harvard; she has now been caught practicing law without a license in the state of Massachusetts.

Surprisingly, her client list includes the same large corporations she has condemned as greedy polluters and exploiters of the “little guy.”

Elizabeth Warren, the workers’ champion, represented LTV Steel in 1995 in its fight against thousands of retired coal miners. Apparently, her loyalty to the worker doesn’t include her own pockets.

In 2009, the Marist lawyer thought it was prudent to represent the Insurance giant Travelers against asbestos victims. Her willingness to stand up for the oppressed doesn’t include the dying; especially when she can make a buck.

The unsinkable Warren has been bold enough to represent Wall Street clients without a law license through the law firm of Simpson, Thacher, & Bartlett, who is aghast to learn of Warrens licensure discrepancy, since she is listed as “of counsel” in briefs filed on behalf of their corporate clients.

To Warren’s credit, she admitted to this slight infraction of practicing law without a license on a radio show.

She has also been accused by fellow law professors of “repeated instances of scientific misconduct” for writing papers that have provided the academic underpinnings for financial and health reform without showing her scientific data. She has been cited as the intellectual architect for the Dodd-Frank Act and Obama Care and her writing has been found to “deeply flawed” during peer review.

Atlantic magazine describes a disturbing pattern of using bogus metrics to advance her Leftist agenda. Warren refuses to provide her back-up data for the “scientific writing” with the same stonewalling technique she uses to avoid providing data to substantiate her claims of minority status.

Ms Warren places herself above public scrutiny by proclaiming she is above us all by her sheer presence and she doesn’t need to operate under the same laws as the rest of us. We have prisons full of people with this same attitude.

The Senate, Harvard, and the people of Massachusetts should review the status of Ms Warren and decide whether they want to be represented by a person who would ordinarily be dismissed as a scoundrel and a conman.

About Skook

A professional horseman for over 40 years, Skook continues to work with horses. He is in an ongoing educational program, learning life's lessons from one of the world's greatest instructors, the horse. Skook has a personal website skooksjournal.com featuring his personal writings and historical novel type stories.
This entry was posted in Communism, Deception and Lies, Economy, Law, Marxism, Nanny Government and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, September 29th, 2012 at 8:38 am
| 492 views

18 Responses to Does Integrity And Honesty Matter In The Senate?

  1. oil guy from Alberta says: 1

    Commonly known as Liawatha Fauxahontas. The left proclaims her as a minority and poor old Jorge Zimmermann as white. Cuckoo we much, to believe this!

    ReplyReply
  2. retire05 says: 2

    Since when is honesty and truthfulness required for a Democrat to run for office?

    ReplyReply
  3. Nan G says: 3

    This part:

    Ms Warren places herself above public scrutiny by proclaiming she is above us all by her sheer presence and she doesn’t need to operate under the same laws as the rest of us. We have prisons full of people with this same attitude.

    Reminded me of that wonderful old movie, Rope, by Alfred Hitchchock.
    Same attitude help by those college boys who strangled their ”friend,” then ate a meal placed on a chest with his body in it.
    All the victim’s friends and family were invited.

    ReplyReply
  4. joetote says: 4

    Here in Nevada, the idiots keep re-electing Harry Reid. I believe that answers your question Skook!

    ReplyReply
  5. James Raider says: 5

    Somewhere in her pathetic mind, she assesses that Obama lied on his own behalf to get elected, and the MSM lied on behalf of Obama to get him elected, . . . ergo, the strategy should work for her.

    ReplyReply
  6. Greg says: 6

    Scott Brown’s repeated public attacks on Warren’s personal identity are going to cost him the election. The man has continued to hammer away on a questionable point that was of little real importance, in spite of the fact that it was clearly alienating voters. He’s got no one to blame but himself.

    ReplyReply
  7. retire05 says: 7

    @Greg:

    Really, Greg? You have no problem with someone who has absolutely no heritage in any Native American tribe using that lie to gain university advancement? I damn sure do. I especially resent Elizabeth Warren trying to use Native American heritage for personal gain.

    It ain’t Scott Brown who is badgering Warren over her fake claims, it is Cherokee people from Oklahoma who are upset that she used them for personal gain.

    ReplyReply
  8. Skookum says: 8

    Does practicing law without a license mean anything to the state of Massachusetts or Harvard University? Obvioisly not, she charged $650/hour for her unlicensed opinions, not bad for an unlicensed lawyer. Why is the status of Harvard considered so special when they hire frauds and liars, and refuse to let them go when they humiliate the university, what a joke. A liar and a fraud, quick elect her to the Senate before she ends up in prison.

    Can someone prove that she has not committed a crime by practicing law without a license or is this part of the Liberal scam of electing frauds and liars.

    ReplyReply
  9. Tom says: 9

    Hmmm, Skooks. Does honesty matter if it turns out you’re wrong Warren’s employment at Harvard is in any way connected to a claim of minority status? I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about that.

    ReplyReply
  10. Greg says: 10

    @retire05:

    Really, Greg? You have no problem with someone who has absolutely no heritage in any Native American tribe using that lie to gain university advancement?

    It was never established that she has “absolutely no heritage in any Native American tribe.” Nor was it ever established that she’s guilty of “using that lie to gain university advancement.”

    She has a family tradition that she has always taken pride in. Brown has repeatedly attacked her on that point–most recently by making the idiotic public assertion that she doesn’t look like an American Indian. The guy is a bozo.

    Regarding Elizabeth Warren’s family history, Amanda Clinton, official spokeswoman for the Cherokee Nation, said this: “We don’t feel it’s the tribe’s place to second guess or place judgment on a person’s family tree.”

    Meanwhile, Bill John Baker, principal chief of Cherokee Nation, had this to say about the behavior of Scott Brown’s campaign staff: “The conduct of these individuals goes far beyond what is appropriate and proper in political discourse. The use of stereotypical ‘war whoop chants’ and ‘tomahawk chops’ are offensive and downright racist. It is those types of actions that perpetuate negative stereotypes and continue to minimize and degrade all native peoples.”

    Scott Brown’s campaign calls staffers’ tomahawk chops ‘unacceptable;’ Cherokee Nation leader denounces ‘offensive and racist’ behavior

    ReplyReply
  11. CharlieGee says: 11

    I remember an old adage saying something like ‘The only good liar is a deadlier’.

    ReplyReply
  12. JustAl says: 12

    Sure, she’s deplorable. And she’d vote with the dems on every issue. But Scotty threw the TEA party under the bus almost immediately and votes with the dems on many things. It’s hard to get excited about Massachusetts, since there hasn’t been a conservative from there elected to public office in living memory. . . remind you of someone?

    ReplyReply
  13. Common Sense says: 13

    @Greg: Coming from the blame Bush Democrats, now that’s really classic. And Reid accusing Romney on taxes? How you coming with the proof on that one??

    ReplyReply
  14. Tom says: 14

    @ justal,

    The Tea Party was foolish to think Brown could support a far right agenda. He wouldn’t have a fart in a tornado’s chance at reelection. Let’s face facts, Mass is a relatively progressive state. First to legalize gay marriage, the incubator of the overwhelmingly popular and successful “Romneycare”. It just reeks of socialism, huh? It also is, unlike most red states, a net contributor to the Federal coffers, as well as being world class in higher education, high tech and finance. Hard to belive, huh? Then again, the real Tea Partiers were pretty successful radical progressives too.

    ReplyReply
  15. CML in Maine says: 15

    There are some kids in Dorchester who would love to take Elizabeth for a ride…..

    ReplyReply
  16. THE DEMOCRATS SUSPECT THAT JESUS HAD A WIFE,
    I THINK I am in direct line from their seedling,
    I keep thinking about him being my grand grand, grand grand time 100 time,father in heaven,

    ReplyReply
  17. Donna Baron says: 17

    I thought our Senators and Representatives were supposed to be over our federal court system. I was dead wrong. I have tried and tried to contact our Congress over a corrupted court system in Dallas TX. Read the story and pass it along.

    BACKGROUND
    This test case involves a quietly successful entrepreneur named Jeff Baron.
    For years, this entrepreneur owned an Internet startup corporation that he established. Ultimately, the entrepreneur found the corporation on the receiving end of litigation by a former business partner. Nine of 10 lawsuits filed by the former partner were dismissed. The tenth lawsuit, overseen by U.S. District Judge Royal Ferguson, resulted in Jeff’s corporation filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. This is when the courts embarked on a series of unconstitutional decisions.

    At the first appearance in court, the judge made the following unprovoked statements in court:

    “any failure to comply with that order is contempt, punishable by lots of dollars, punishable by possible jail, death…I’m telling you don’t screw with me. You are a fool, a fool, a fool, a fool to screw with a federal judge, and if you don’t understand that, I can make you understand it. I have the force of the Navy, Army, Marines and Navy behind me.

    During the course of this civil case, the District Court placed not only the Company, but the entrepreneur himself under the power of the judge’s friends whom he made “trustees/wardens” and placed the entrepreneur into a bizarre “civil lockdown”. This means that ALL of the entrepreneur’s personal and professional assets – bank accounts, property, clients, even the clothes on his back – have been seized. And the Court ruled that the entrepreneur CANNOT under any circumstances hire legal counsel. And he may not earn an income. His “person” is also under the complete control of the “trustees/wardens” in which the Court deemed a personal “receivership”. This is the first time, to my knowledge, an individual has been “legally” placed under involuntary receivership since the abolition of slavery in 1865.

    All of these rulings were made without due process. Without a trial. Without representation. And without a crime! The entrepreneur has never been accused of committing any crime. Yet, his constitutional rights have been stripped. The rulings in this test case violate the 4th, 5th and 7th and 13th Amendments to our U.S. Constitution. To my knowledge, this is the only case of such a situation in US history.

    IMPACT ON AMERICANS: A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT
    This is not only a case of federal power gone awry, but is setting precedent. Now that the Judge has ruled that “civil lockdowns” are legal, unless it is overturned, it may be used as a precedent for future cases, giving judges the ultimate power to strip citizens of their Constitutional rights and of their property without due process. And it can happen to any one of us. For any reason. Or no reason at all.

    I implore you to investigate this case and expose the unlawful acts that threaten our freedoms and rights as U.S. Citizens.

    The only news coverage of this case thus far has been by the Washington Examiner’s columnist Barbara Hollingsworth which can be read here: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2012/02/federal-judge-puts-internet-pioneer-civil-lockdown/272761 This will give you a sense of the story. In addition, the website http://LawInjustice.com contains certified court documents along with some editorialized content.
    P.S. Without being accused of any crime, several lawyers and judges got together in ex parte to create a new precedent with total disregard of Civil rights. This is a precedent setting test (Canary in a coal mine) case designed to become legacy for the Federal Judge. He, instead of following the law, he is following his own agenda.

    ReplyReply
  18. Donna Baron
    what a sad story, and dangerous to the citizens trying to run their own business being drag into such corrupt representatives of the justice trying to break him by
    using their power as a weapon,
    their title granted to them for the opposite destroying, but for helping society ,
    he should be thrown out , and rip of his title and power, so to prevent him to do further damages to
    good people, this is criminal to do what he have done, fear mongering is a sign that this GOVERNMENT use easy to scare the people who face and expose them ,
    that judge said, I will render you financially
    and physicaly render you unable to fight,
    there is a name for people using fear to scare other.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>