XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: SaPeIsMa@gmail.com   
      
   "Tom McDonald"  wrote in message   
   news:_bnpt.15217$uT3.13086@newsfe20.iad...   
   > On 5/29/2013 7:36 AM, SaPeIsMa wrote:   
   >> "Tom McDonald"  wrote in message   
   >> news:%bept.42659$9X5.15117@newsfe31.iad...   
   >>> On 5/28/2013 9:53 PM, SaPeIsMa wrote:   
   >>>> "Jeanne Douglas"  wrote in message   
   >>>> news:hlwdjsd2-08852C.17293125052013@news.giganews.com...   
   >>>>> In article   
   >>>>> ,   
   >>>>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> In article , "SaPeIsMa"   
   >>>>>>    
   >>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> > "Jeanne Douglas"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>> > news:hlwdjsd2-E96C05.22033024052013@news.giganews.com...   
   >>>>>> > > In article   
   >>>>>> > > ,   
   >>>>>> > > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:   
   >>>>>> > >   
   >>>>>> > >   
   >>>>>> > >> It's possible that Cindy Thomas (IRS supervisor) was following   
   >>>>>> > >> instructions she received from her bosses in the White House.   
   >>>>>> Read > >> this:   
   >>>>>> > >>   
   >>>>>> > >> I read one report indicating that some liberal democrat   
   >>>>>> members of   
   >>>>>> > >> Congress that were upset about tea party group's influence told   
   >>>>>> > >> Obama   
   >>>>>> > >> and   
   >>>>>> > >> his top aides that they should send the IRS after the tea party   
   >>>>>> > >> groups.   
   >>>>>> > >> That leads me to believe that it is possible that the IRS > >>   
   >>>>>> supervisors   
   >>>>>> > >> such   
   >>>>>> > >> as Cindy Thomas were following orders passed down from their   
   >>>>>> bosses > >> in   
   >>>>>> > >> the   
   >>>>>> > >> White House.   
   >>>>>> > >   
   >>>>>> > > Why would she obey illegal orders.   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > Because she's a good little ideological drone ?   
   >>>>>> > Because she doesn't have the brass to refuse ?   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > >   
   >>>>>> > > And remember that the President has no power over   
   >>>>>> > > non-politically-appointed workers.   
   >>>>>> > >   
   >>>>>> >   
   >>>>>> > The President has all kinds of power, both direct and indirect.   
   >>>>>> > Hell, the promise that she would be taken care of and protected if   
   >>>>>> > things   
   >>>>>> > blow up would be good enough...   
   >>>>>> > One woman got to become a US Supreme Court Justice for all the work   
   >>>>>> she > did   
   >>>>>> > to help push through Obamacare.   
   >>>>>> > And she didn't even have the decency to recuse herself when the   
   >>>>>> case > came   
   >>>>>> > to   
   >>>>>> > the Supreme Court.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I worked for a state agency before I retired. I worked with some   
   >>>>>> employees   
   >>>>>> just like Cindy Thomas. They would do whatever the boss told them   
   >>>>>> to do   
   >>>>>> (even if it was a violation of the rules). They knew that was the   
   >>>>>> best way   
   >>>>>> to get promotions. They were correct. Many of them got the promotions   
   >>>>>> they   
   >>>>>> were seeking since the top bosses knew they would obey their orders   
   >>>>>> even   
   >>>>>> if the orders were in violation of the rules or laws. We called   
   >>>>>> them ass   
   >>>>>> kissers and lap dogs.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It worked out for the lady that Obama appointed to the supreme court.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> What? What the fuck are you talking about?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You really are this ignorant ??   
   >>>> Let me repeat the clues for the clueless   
   >>>>     ++ One woman got to become a US Supreme Court Justice   
   >>>>     ++ for all the work she did  to help push through Obamacare.   
   >>>>     ++ And she didn't even have the decency to recuse herself   
   >>>>     ++ when the case came to the Supreme Court.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I'll give you another clue, because you are so stump-ignorant   
   >>>>     Her name starts with a "K"..   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> So you are pissing and moaning about something Scalia and Thomas do?   
   >>> ?> >  > Why?   
   >>   
   >> What are you babbling about now ?   
   >> What are you claiming that Scalia and Thomas do ?   
   >   
   >  They didn't recuse themselves from cases in which they had a   
   > conflict of interest. I thought that was fairly clear. Apparently you need   
   > things spoon-fed you.   
   >   
      
   What cases where those ?   
   You're making the claims, YOU PROVE your claim   
      
   Apparently you imagine that just by making statements, we should   
   automatically accept them at face value   
   Considering you have lied in the past, that won't happen soon.   
      
      
   >> Unlike Kagan. NEITHER worked on pushing Obamacare through   
   >>     Clearly the notion of Conflict of Interest is beyond you   
   >>   
   >> You're such an imbecilic troll, you should  yourself.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)