RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (Full Version)

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



Message

truckinslave -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 7:08:26 AM)

There are two judges who have ruled against 0bama0Care. Which one, and what lobbying firm? Give me something to start on, please.

Virginia Thomas is an executive with a group that I believe filed an amicus curiae with SCOTUS concerning CU. She did not, so far as I know, "advise" on the matter, and her earnings over a five-year period are reported as far short of a million. You are correct- no conflict of interest, and certainly no outrage by me.



truckinslave -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 7:10:50 AM)

There are clearly reasons for recusal that have nothing to do with financial matters.



Moonhead -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 7:19:41 AM)

As your notion is obviously that the most important quality for a Presidential candidate is executive experience, am I to take it that you voted for Perot in '92 and the succesful peanut farmer in '76? How about Al "climate man" Gore back in '00, as he came from a business background?

Or is this just some mantra you and the rest of the teabaggers have picked up from Rush to try to credit caribou Barbie with something the Kenyan can't lay claim to, however irrelevant?



mnottertail -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 7:21:31 AM)

We have one small bit of agreement then.  However that was not the thrust nor a substantial consideration of my point.  The point is, for what reason is there to recuse?

Absolutely none. 



truckinslave -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 7:39:03 AM)

quote:

We have one small bit of agreement then.


Here? Not so much.



DomKen -> RE: The tangled web in Wisconsin (4/4/2011 9:23:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

Senate Chief Clerk (a non-partisan position) Rob Marchant, whose job it is to advise on such things, is all over the web opining both before and after the meeting in question that all legal niceties were met.

Do your own damned research.

Maing shit up again.

Marchant said
quote:

However, Marchant said it is unclear whether they abided by the 2-hour minimum notice even with the exception of a "good cause."

"At that time I believed there was two hours notice given," Marchant said. "There wasn't, from the sound of it, or at least it's not possible to say with 100 percent that two hours notice was given."

http://www.dailycardinal.com/news/judge-sumi-continues-tro-on-union-law-1.2139521



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125