RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse

RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:12:15 PM)
I am not opposed, nor would I think anyone left or right be opposed to voter ID, so long as the ones that want it pay for it lock and stock and barrel. Millions for defense, not a penny for tribute, no poll taxes.

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:15:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin what you just said is SOOOO FUNNY, I have a friend who is an absolute OBAMA FAN this is his reply to me talking about all the "scandels" and the American people replied and said zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz but if you ask him about VOTER ID, which the supreme court has already ruled is fine to do, and is in effect in about 30 states, he'll go ON AN ON AN ON about how OUTRAGED the ENTIRE COUNTRY IS!! funny how they impeached nixon for doing what this admin has done with the IRS, and NO ONE CARES, but when a state does what more than 1/2 of the other states are ALREADY DOING (voter ID) with no problems whatsoever, welll its a BIG DEAL! Nixon tried to use the IRS to investigate Nixon's enemies list and prosecute them for tax issues. Now the IRS has made a few organizations, that were at the very least very nearly not eligible for a particular tax status, wait a little longer for their approval and in some cases submit some extra paper work. How precisely are these the same? Voter ID that accepts a wide range of ID is fine. Voter ID that accepts almost no forms of ID and in which the state involved is careful to make getting those forms of ID harder for the people the GOP doesn't want voting is not ok. No, no you got that wrong. Now OBama has used the IRS to investigate at least 3 political enemies (republicans). Now Obama has used the IRS to delay the formation of more than 72 tea party organizations past an election. How is that different than Nixon. Gee, wally, I guess its not! the rest of your characterization - (not eligible, 'some extra paperwork') is just offensive buffoonery. You are either lying or grossly misinformed. Name the 3 political enemies Obama had investigated and present some evidence, actual evidence not crazy shit on some blog, that Obama actually did order the investigations. As to the political groups, they already existed when they applied for 501(c)4 status so there is no way their formation was delayed. And as I have pointed out many times by the letter of the law none of those groups were eligible for 501(c)4 status and the reason they sought that status was to evade federal law on the disclosure of donors to political groups. How all these right wingers who howl and moan and complain about potential, maybe, might possibly happen election law violations that necessitate disenfranchising poor and elderly people all over the country but turn a blind eye to their own organizations willful and deliberate violation of election law shows the underlying hypocrisy of the present conservative movement. So unless you can come up with some evidence to support the claim that Obama used the IRS to investigate three entities you are still completely and utterly wrong.

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:26:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I thought voter ID laws, these days were just aimed at keeping non-citizens and dead people from voting. That's right. The left insists that "undocumented" aliens have a right to vote (More people to vote themselves free shit that they'll never have to pay for)? Wrong. We just want all eligible citizens to have the ability. For instance under the new Texas law a list of ID that is acceptable includes driver's licenses and a state ID issued only at the same locations as the DL, CCW permits, military ID and passports. But not college ID's or a lot of other photo ID's, or even expired DL's and ID's, despite the fact that Texas already requires proof of citizenship at the time a person registers to vote. A big problem in Texas is the state doesn't have a DL facility in every county and there are several areas where it is more than 100 miles to such a facility which puts a significant burden on the poor and elderly if they want to be able to vote. I have no problem with setting up lots of DL offices. Even better would be just letting people get voting cards at a variety of state buildings. As long as citizenship is proved. I really don't think you will find much opposition to that, Dom Ken. I would also like to get rid of early voting as it makes fraud possible. I would be fine with doubling or tripling the number of voting stations. I would be fine with putting a system in place where if lines were more than 2 hours long, the person in charge of elections in each county loses his job. I don't want any one to be disenfranchised - and that means disenfranchised by way of fraud as well. I want everyone to vote. Once. And that's the problem with the Texas law, there is no provision to expand where you can go to get the ID's. And the list is so narrow and excludes ID that would be sufficient to register that it is clear that the intent is to disenfranchise eligible voters in demographics that do not in general vote for Republicans. Consider this, everywhere in the country you must prove citizenship to register. Even in Texas you can register with an expired picture ID, your SS card and a recent bill (for proof of address). So if that is good enough to register why is it not good enough at the polling place? As to early voting I cannot begin to see how it contributes to fraud. Do you think poll workers do not check the registrations or fail to record that the person has voted? Even a one hour line would make it hard for the elderly and disabled. Plus a lot of people have a hard time getting to a polling place on a workday. Early voting, especially nigh and weekend hours, provides an opportunity for people to vote who otherwise could not get to the polls. IMO it is good for the health of the republic that more citizens are able to participate.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I thought voter ID laws, these days were just aimed at keeping non-citizens and dead people from voting. That's right. The left insists that "undocumented" aliens have a right to vote (More people to vote themselves free shit that they'll never have to pay for)? Wrong. We just want all eligible citizens to have the ability. For instance under the new Texas law a list of ID that is acceptable includes driver's licenses and a state ID issued only at the same locations as the DL, CCW permits, military ID and passports. But not college ID's or a lot of other photo ID's, or even expired DL's and ID's, despite the fact that Texas already requires proof of citizenship at the time a person registers to vote. A big problem in Texas is the state doesn't have a DL facility in every county and there are several areas where it is more than 100 miles to such a facility which puts a significant burden on the poor and elderly if they want to be able to vote. I have no problem with setting up lots of DL offices. Even better would be just letting people get voting cards at a variety of state buildings. As long as citizenship is proved. I really don't think you will find much opposition to that, Dom Ken. I would also like to get rid of early voting as it makes fraud possible. I would be fine with doubling or tripling the number of voting stations. I would be fine with putting a system in place where if lines were more than 2 hours long, the person in charge of elections in each county loses his job. I don't want any one to be disenfranchised - and that means disenfranchised by way of fraud as well. I want everyone to vote. Once. And that's the problem with the Texas law, there is no provision to expand where you can go to get the ID's. And the list is so narrow and excludes ID that would be sufficient to register that it is clear that the intent is to disenfranchise eligible voters in demographics that do not in general vote for Republicans. Consider this, everywhere in the country you must prove citizenship to register. Even in Texas you can register with an expired picture ID, your SS card and a recent bill (for proof of address). So if that is good enough to register why is it not good enough at the polling place? As to early voting I cannot begin to see how it contributes to fraud. Do you think poll workers do not check the registrations or fail to record that the person has voted? Even a one hour line would make it hard for the elderly and disabled. Plus a lot of people have a hard time getting to a polling place on a workday. Early voting, especially nigh and weekend hours, provides an opportunity for people to vote who otherwise could not get to the polls. IMO it is good for the health of the republic that more citizens are able to participate. I don't mind setting the bar at one hour either. Early voting contributes to fraud in the sense that it gives multiple opportunities for people to go out into the community and say.. have you voted yet? Here's a turkey.. let me show you how to vote. We are guaranteed due process. Everyones vote is treated equally. I just don't see how its possible to say all votes are treated the same with things like absentee ballots, early voting, etc. Make voting easy. Treat all people the same. Early voting makes the early votes subject to tampering and fraud. Did 3000 people vote - or 30,000 people. It makes handling the voting machines suspect. How do you know that voting machines didn't get preloaded after early voting - as one suit alleges happened in PA? Look, I am more than happy to agitate for free and fair voting for all If you are willing to agitate equally to stop fraud.

mnottertail -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:42:54 PM)
Early voting contributes to fraud in the sense that it gives multiple opportunities for people to go out into the community and say.. have you voted yet? Here's a turkey.. let me show you how to vote. ........ and if those are private citizens, it is perfectly legal. But it also gives people who cannot vote on the day at the time an opportunity to vote, having gotten their turkey from the other party.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:46:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BitYakin what you just said is SOOOO FUNNY, I have a friend who is an absolute OBAMA FAN this is his reply to me talking about all the "scandels" and the American people replied and said zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz but if you ask him about VOTER ID, which the supreme court has already ruled is fine to do, and is in effect in about 30 states, he'll go ON AN ON AN ON about how OUTRAGED the ENTIRE COUNTRY IS!! funny how they impeached nixon for doing what this admin has done with the IRS, and NO ONE CARES, but when a state does what more than 1/2 of the other states are ALREADY DOING (voter ID) with no problems whatsoever, welll its a BIG DEAL! Nixon tried to use the IRS to investigate Nixon's enemies list and prosecute them for tax issues. Now the IRS has made a few organizations, that were at the very least very nearly not eligible for a particular tax status, wait a little longer for their approval and in some cases submit some extra paper work. How precisely are these the same? Voter ID that accepts a wide range of ID is fine. Voter ID that accepts almost no forms of ID and in which the state involved is careful to make getting those forms of ID harder for the people the GOP doesn't want voting is not ok. No, no you got that wrong. Now OBama has used the IRS to investigate at least 3 political enemies (republicans). Now Obama has used the IRS to delay the formation of more than 72 tea party organizations past an election. How is that different than Nixon. Gee, wally, I guess its not! the rest of your characterization - (not eligible, 'some extra paperwork') is just offensive buffoonery. You are either lying or grossly misinformed. Name the 3 political enemies Obama had investigated and present some evidence, actual evidence not crazy shit on some blog, that Obama actually did order the investigations. As to the political groups, they already existed when they applied for 501(c)4 status so there is no way their formation was delayed. And as I have pointed out many times by the letter of the law none of those groups were eligible for 501(c)4 status and the reason they sought that status was to evade federal law on the disclosure of donors to political groups. How all these right wingers who howl and moan and complain about potential, maybe, might possibly happen election law violations that necessitate disenfranchising poor and elderly people all over the country but turn a blind eye to their own organizations willful and deliberate violation of election law shows the underlying hypocrisy of the present conservative movement. So unless you can come up with some evidence to support the claim that Obama used the IRS to investigate three entities you are still completely and utterly wrong. I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. As for proving that Obummer did it - I don't have to. Whether it was him, or a political appointee installed by him - its still his administration. And the buck stops there. As for the groups already being established - I have previously and copiously proved that this is a bullshit herring. The groups lost grant money because they didn't have tax status. They lost donations for the same reason. No one is going to donate money to a non tax exempt group when other groups have exampt status. If you want to fight overreaching government do you want your (taxed) donations going to support it? And the damages these groups faced were the reason that their is now a law suit against the federal govt. Were there no evidence of damage the suit would have been tossed at first reading. Finally - what you completely gloss over is that the obummer administration purposely sat on these groups to preclude their participation in the electoral process. If you can't even admit that - you have no business calling for free and fair voting - because what you mean is free and fair voting for democrats.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 1:53:04 PM)
double post.

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 2:03:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. As for proving that Obummer did it - I don't have to. Whether it was him, or a political appointee installed by him - its still his administration. And the buck stops there. You made the claim. What 3 groups and what evidence. quote: As for the groups already being established - I have previously and copiously proved that this is a bullshit herring. The groups lost grant money because they didn't have tax status. They lost donations for the same reason. No one is going to donate money to a non tax exempt group when other groups have exampt status. If you want to fight overreaching government do you want your (taxed) donations going to support it? You grossly misunderstand. You don't need 501(c) status to not pay taxes. Any organization that makes no profit pays no tax. Donations to 501(c)4 organizations are not tax exempt that is only 501(c)3 organizations. This was entirely about evading campaign donation disclosure requirements. quote: And the damages these groups faced were the reason that their is now a law suit against the federal govt. Were there no evidence of damage the suit would have been tossed at first reading. The civil suit won't get tossed until it actually gets a hearing which hasn't happened yet. They still haven't gotten the judge to waive sovereign immunity and until that happens, which is unlikely, this case is going no where. quote: Finally - what you completely gloss over is that the obummer administration purposely sat on these groups to preclude their participation in the electoral process. They did participate. The group suing, True the Vote, was the group that sent out incorrectly trained poll watchers all over the nation. Once again, these groups all existed when they applied and nothing kept them from doing anything. All the delay in getting 501(c)4 status meant was donors could not know if their names would have to disclosed as federal law requires for all donations to political groups. So it is a black letter election law violation. I though you right wingers were all about the rule of law?

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 2:13:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Early voting contributes to fraud in the sense that it gives multiple opportunities for people to go out into the community and say.. have you voted yet? Here's a turkey.. let me show you how to vote. That is no more or less legal before election day or during early voting. I do not see how early voting makes t more likely. quote: We are guaranteed due process. Everyones vote is treated equally. I just don't see how its possible to say all votes are treated the same with things like absentee ballots, early voting, etc. Make voting easy. Treat all people the same. Early voting makes the early votes subject to tampering and fraud. Did 3000 people vote - or 30,000 people. It makes handling the voting machines suspect. How do you know that voting machines didn't get preloaded after early voting - as one suit alleges happened in PA? What would prevent a voting machine being preloaded on election day? You concerns seem to have no substance the same measures are in place during early voting as there is in normal election day voting. quote: Look, I am more than happy to agitate for free and fair voting for all If you are willing to agitate equally to stop fraud. I oppose all fraud in regards to elections. That includes a belief that life imprisonment and forfeiture of all property should be the one and only penalty for all people or groups convicted. That includes distributing pamphlets telling people to vote on the day after election day, vote caging by private groups and all the numerous ways the GOP and its affiliates use to try and suppress the vote. Now do you actually stand with that or not?

Powergamz1 -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 2:56:55 PM)
As anyone who has ever formed a 501 knows, you can in fact apply for grants, and accept donations while your application is pending, you merely note it as such, and use a PFA. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. As for proving that Obummer did it - I don't have to. Whether it was him, or a political appointee installed by him - its still his administration. And the buck stops there. As for the groups already being established - I have previously and copiously proved that this is a bullshit herring. The groups lost grant money because they didn't have tax status. They lost donations for the same reason. No one is going to donate money to a non tax exempt group when other groups have exampt status. If you want to fight overreaching government do you want your (taxed) donations going to support it? And the damages these groups faced were the reason that their is now a law suit against the federal govt. Were there no evidence of damage the suit would have been tossed at first reading. Finally - what you completely gloss over is that the obummer administration purposely sat on these groups to preclude their participation in the electoral process. If you can't even admit that - you have no business calling for free and fair voting - because what you mean is free and fair voting for democrats.

Moonhead -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 5:04:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. If these witnesses are so credible, why do they refuse to name names, or be named themselves? Without that much the story barely even qualifies as an urban myth. Naming one Kenyan appointee to the IRS who might or might not have had anything to do with the tantrum over teabaggers claiming charity status doesn't count.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 11:34:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Early voting contributes to fraud in the sense that it gives multiple opportunities for people to go out into the community and say.. have you voted yet? Here's a turkey.. let me show you how to vote. That is no more or less legal before election day or during early voting. I do not see how early voting makes t more likely. It is easier to maintain proper security on a voting machine for one day, than it is for 15 days or more. Hell, in some places now absentee ballots were available before the last presidential debate. Cmon. The number of people that would have access to the machines (since they are typically broken down and setup multiple times, and typically used in multiple locations (one in early voting, one in regular voting). People don't work the things continuously - they have multiple shifts. Image those machines were stacks of 20 dollars. Do you think anyone in their right mind would think leaving them exposed for 2 weeks or more is equally secure as one day? quote: We are guaranteed due process. Everyones vote is treated equally. I just don't see how its possible to say all votes are treated the same with things like absentee ballots, early voting, etc. Make voting easy. Treat all people the same. Early voting makes the early votes subject to tampering and fraud. Did 3000 people vote - or 30,000 people. It makes handling the voting machines suspect. How do you know that voting machines didn't get preloaded after early voting - as one suit alleges happened in PA? What would prevent a voting machine being preloaded on election day? You concerns seem to have no substance the same measures are in place during early voting as there is in normal election day voting. quote: Look, I am more than happy to agitate for free and fair voting for all If you are willing to agitate equally to stop fraud. I oppose all fraud in regards to elections. That includes a belief that life imprisonment and forfeiture of all property should be the one and only penalty for all people or groups convicted. That includes distributing pamphlets telling people to vote on the day after election day, vote caging by private groups and all the numerous ways the GOP and its affiliates use to try and suppress the vote. Now do you actually stand with that or not? So long as you are against black panthers intimidating white people. 124 precincts where not one vote was cast for Romney. Removing dead people and other unqualified from the voter rolls. As for telling people to vote on the day after election day - I find it despicable. However, that one gives me trouble because of the freespeech issues. If that is ok to ban - then what else is ok to ban? But generally speaking - yes. I told you I'm in favor of everyone voting on one day. I'm in favor of enough voting machines so that lines are reasonable. I would even support having the day be on a Saturday or a Sunday, so people can vote. I'm not in favor of people having absentee ballots. If your plans are more importing than voting - then don't vote. The only exception to me are people called away on govt service. Peace Corp volunteers. Military on deployment. Firefighters fighting a fire. etc.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 11:37:27 PM)
And as anyone who has ever worked for a 501 knows, not having the appropriate status can doom your fundraising efforts and make you ineligible for grants, matching funds etc. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 As anyone who has ever formed a 501 knows, you can in fact apply for grants, and accept donations while your application is pending, you merely note it as such, and use a PFA. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. As for proving that Obummer did it - I don't have to. Whether it was him, or a political appointee installed by him - its still his administration. And the buck stops there. As for the groups already being established - I have previously and copiously proved that this is a bullshit herring. The groups lost grant money because they didn't have tax status. They lost donations for the same reason. No one is going to donate money to a non tax exempt group when other groups have exampt status. If you want to fight overreaching government do you want your (taxed) donations going to support it? And the damages these groups faced were the reason that their is now a law suit against the federal govt. Were there no evidence of damage the suit would have been tossed at first reading. Finally - what you completely gloss over is that the obummer administration purposely sat on these groups to preclude their participation in the electoral process. If you can't even admit that - you have no business calling for free and fair voting - because what you mean is free and fair voting for democrats.

Phydeaux -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/25/2013 11:46:26 PM)
Aprl 23: Obama meets with the political appointee for the IRS (WW) - for an hour and a half. April 24: IRS director goes to the white house and meets for 8.5 hours. April 25: New regulations regarding Tea Party applications are published.

Powergamz1 -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 12:25:39 AM)
That's another one in a long line of factually incorrect statements, and denial of relaity. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux And as anyone who has ever worked for a 501 knows, not having the appropriate status can doom your fundraising efforts and make you ineligible for grants, matching funds etc. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 As anyone who has ever formed a 501 knows, you can in fact apply for grants, and accept donations while your application is pending, you merely note it as such, and use a PFA. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I'm neither lying nor misinformed. Scroll back. Link said that the creditable witness said that the IRS deliberately targeted republican candidates - and other occassions were "inadvertent". Sure they were. As for proving that Obummer did it - I don't have to. Whether it was him, or a political appointee installed by him - its still his administration. And the buck stops there. As for the groups already being established - I have previously and copiously proved that this is a bullshit herring. The groups lost grant money because they didn't have tax status. They lost donations for the same reason. No one is going to donate money to a non tax exempt group when other groups have exampt status. If you want to fight overreaching government do you want your (taxed) donations going to support it? And the damages these groups faced were the reason that their is now a law suit against the federal govt. Were there no evidence of damage the suit would have been tossed at first reading. Finally - what you completely gloss over is that the obummer administration purposely sat on these groups to preclude their participation in the electoral process. If you can't even admit that - you have no business calling for free and fair voting - because what you mean is free and fair voting for democrats.

Powergamz1 -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 12:28:16 AM)
April 1st. Obama makes 'Kill Whitey' video. 4.5 hours. Wow, you are right, that is fun! Let's try another one... February 31st. Obama force US Marines to wear shoes while inside the White House...2 hours. September 3rd 1971. Obama and Bill Ayres visit North Vietnam and help shoot down US aircraft... 3 hours. Your turn [8\|] quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Aprl 23: Obama meets with the political appointee for the IRS (WW) - for an hour and a half. April 24: IRS director goes to the white house and meets for 8.5 hours. April 25: New regulations regarding Tea Party applications are published.

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 2:59:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux But generally speaking - yes. I told you I'm in favor of everyone voting on one day. I'm in favor of enough voting machines so that lines are reasonable. I would even support having the day be on a Saturday or a Sunday, so people can vote. Voting on Saturday would exclude observant Jews. Voting on Sunday would exclude many observant Christians. The issues you have with early voting make no sense to me and you objections seem completely over blown. Your responses in this post don't even correspond to the issues I was responding that you had raised.

DomKen -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 3:01:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Aprl 23: Obama meets with the political appointee for the IRS (WW) - for an hour and a half. April 24: IRS director goes to the white house and meets for 8.5 hours. April 25: New regulations regarding Tea Party applications are published. And those meetings were not in private and would include someone taking notes. It would be kind of stupid to issue the order you claim in that situation. You're clutching at straws.

cloudboy -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 3:20:02 AM)
Hope always reflects elements of desperation. Also, the right doesn't always need a rational basis to support its views. Facts often are nothing more than a nuisance. It's the drudge headlines that matter most.

graceadieu -> RE: IRS Scandal Reaches Whitehouse (7/26/2013 7:49:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic So if we accept that Grace, then that law must be a real disaster, because they are still having to push back implementation. On the up side, it does always make me smile when Obamabots default to the, "they aren't abusing their power, they are just totally incompetent," defense. How is it incompetence? They're pushing back the requirement that medium and large employers provide healthcare to their full-time employees. I agree that that's bullshit - because it's just pandering to big business. But there's nothing incompetent about that, just a little cowardly.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125