Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by alexr (My Page) on
Sun, Mar 16, 14 at 18:15

something about a billboard... gee, they didn't even call him a what he really is- a man responsible for the suffering and even death of the people of his state

""MoveOn.org has every right to attack Gov. Jindal, the state's refusal to accept Medicaid or, for that matter, me personally. But they do not have the right to use our protected service mark, which is used solely for the purpose of promoting and marketing Louisiana. We own the mark and its use is under the direction of my office, not the Office of the Governor."

In response to the suit, MoveOn.org Civic Action's Executive Direct Anna Galland said the organization hasn't yet received notice of the complaint, but, "if press reports are accurate, it is very sad to see the state spend taxpayer money on a frivolous lawsuit instead of providing health care to the people of Louisiana.,

no kidding-

"Once our lawyers receive and have a chance to fully review the complaint we will have more to say. In the meantime, we strongly urge Governor Jindal to do the right thing and allow 242,000 Louisianans to access Medicaid."

Way to go guv'nor...

Here is a link that might be useful: link


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Sounds frivolous to me. Who knows where something like that could go... especially since I had no idea colors and fonts could be trademarked. They apparently can be.

Probably considered a capitulation, but I might consider retooling the billboard with well placed pasters in colors and fonts and tag lines Louisiana never dreamed of. Of course, this flap will get the message out.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Moveon.org is a public welfare 501c just like the girl scouts.

As such, its able to rake in bazillions of anonymous donations to promote health insurance for Lousiana's girl scouts.

So, suing moveon.org is like suing the girl scouts.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Why does Bobby Jindal hate the Girl Scouts?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Maybe he got a bad box of Samoas.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

They have spent millions of dollars on that logo?

Geez.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

And where is mrsK to explain this whole flap away as a case of regional bigotry and prejudice? I always liked getting the insider's perspective--not a problem, we are wonderful in Louisiana!

Wish someone would put up some such billboard around Kansas City, Kansas or Wichita (or both). Kansas is one of those neon red states that made sure President Obama's ACA didn't even get anywhere near the state. Kansans don't need any handout from the federal government, after all. We are all healthy.

Kate


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

So, the Governor of Louisiana would be willing to spend taxpayer money on protecting a logo, but not on the health care of his constituents?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by jodik 5 (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 10:03

So, the Governor of Louisiana would be willing to spend taxpayer money on protecting a logo, but not on the health care of his constituents?

*

Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation.

Jindal isn't against healthcare to citizens of this state.
Keep in mind that Obama's way is not always THE way
to accomplish anything.

"We will not allow President Obama to bully Louisiana into accepting an expansion of Obamacare. “We have rejected Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in Louisiana because it would cost Louisiana taxpayers up to $1.7 billion over the next ten years and move nearly 250,000 Louisianians from private coverage to Medicaid. “The disastrous rollout of Obamacare is a case in point that we don’t need top-down, one-size-fits-all federal mandates, and instead should continue to focus on health care solutions that make sense for Louisiana. “Obamacare needs to be repealed. The dysfunction of the website and the President’s broken promises on being able to keep your health plan are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the problems with this law.”


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

In other words, it's Obama-care and Louisiana doesn't want anything to do with Obama. Even if it's good for them.

Period. End of story.

Kate


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 11:00

Keep in mind that Obama's way is not always THE way
to accomplish anything.

It certainly isn't, but it's the best way available right now.

How many citizens of Louisiana have to suffer and maybe die, before Gov. Jindal finds THE way? Who does he think he is, God?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation.

Well..... only an idiot would believe the bogus cheap rotten no good claptrap of an explanation that Jindal puts out.

It's free for the next couple years anyway, he could 'opt' out later, but no, the people of Louisiana might like not like having to suffer and die for their governor's political views.

Bobby Jindal the new Josef Mengele of Louisiana.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Yeah. Reason forbid we invest in the health and well-being of our fellow human beings...

Exactly so, Mom... we didn't get the full boat we wanted in health care reform, but what we did get is a good start, and it's much better than just leaving a broken system broken and doing nothing.

It's just really telling when a Governor says he's willing to protect a logo, given what that entails... but he's not willing to spend a dime by expanding his state's Medicaid to help the people who voted him into office.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation.

Jindal, and anyone that agrees with not expanding medicare for poor people so they can receive health care, should be ashamed of themselves. And not call people that think poor people should have access to healthcare idiots.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on Sun, Mar 16, 14 at 20:12

"Why does Bobby Jindal hate the Girl Scouts?"

And that is a fine example of how to make simpletons believe what you would like for them to believe. Propaganda 101. So simple. So devious. So demonstrably effective.

Sue away, Bobby Jindal. Copyright infringement is what it is and frivolous deflections are what they are too.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 13:57

And that is a fine example of how to make simpletons believe what you would like for them to believe. Propaganda 101. So simple. So devious. So demonstrably effective.

I think she got that, it's hard to show "tongue-in-cheek" on the page.

And name-calling isn't very attractive, at any age.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Making healthy decisions for the state are not always popular. Good for Jindal.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Why does Bobby Jindal hate the Girl Scouts?"

Now I think that is funny. Who says libruls don't a sense of humor?

Or is it only funny when the "humor" comes from a conservative mocking a librul?

Kate


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Making healthy decisions for the state is what Jindal ought to do but has not done He’s proved that he’s a member of the Party of Stupid.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It is interesting that not one of you bothered to read the original article and discover that Bobby Jindal isn't suing anyone in this either in his own name or as Governor. MoveOn .org is being sued by the Lt. Governor as head of the Louisiana Tourism Bureau. It doesn't even have anything to do with Jindal's name being used. It is strictly about the trademark which was used without permission.

Breaking the law or even bending it isn't something that MoveOn.org is allowed to do anymore than anyone else. They screwed up. Pay the fines, put up some other sign that doesn't infringe on copyrights and trademarks. Someone at MoveOn.org goofed(again)or they just didn't care about the law. Considering past history, I suspect it is the latter.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It's about using a trademark without the right to do so. The way the article was written -- it is no wonder there is a misconception of what it's all about.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by brass_tacks 8b/GA (My Page) on Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 16:40

"It's about using a trademark without the right to do so. The way the article was written -- it is no wonder there is a misconception of what it's all about."

Oh wah. Can't we go on for several posts about the Girl Scouts and birth control or gender equality? BT and Sleepless, you're on point and on topic! How about that.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 17:18

Here's what the email from MoveOn.org says.

The state of Louisiana is suing MoveOn.org in federal court. They're trying to force us to take down a billboard that calls out Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal - an aspiring presidential candidate - for denying health care to 242,000 people.

It doesn't say any more than that, the rest is self-promotion and fund-raising. But it doesn't say that the Governor is suing them, only the State of Louisiana.

They are similar, but not completely the same.

I feel bad for the people in Louisiana who won't get health insurance. It must be very discouraging for them, no matter what political party they belong to.

Here is a link that might be useful: Here's the Louisiana site


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Oh wah. Can't we go on for several posts about the Girl Scouts and birth control or gender equality?”

How dopey can you get, elvis?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 13:27

Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation.

Jindal, and anyone that agrees with not expanding medicare for poor people so they can receive health care, should be ashamed of themselves. And not call people that think poor people should have access to healthcare idiots.

*

Check your reading skills.

I did not do anything of the sort.

As usual.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It is interesting that not one of you bothered to read the original article and discover that Bobby Jindal isn't suing anyone in this either in his own name or as Governor. MoveOn .org is being sued by the Lt. Governor as head of the Louisiana Tourism Bureau.

You have got to be kidding or just delusional. Of course it is the State of Louisiana that is bringing the suit, as someone pointed out, but that wasn't as much fun for me to post and it isn't really the truth.

You know (or should know) and I know that it isn't the people of Louisiana that are interested in suing Move On .org about a billboard. Sorry but it is the Governor (Jindal) and his denial of health care that is under attack. He's the governor and his Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne has been trying to get the billboard taken down..

"Pick your passion. But hope you don't love your health. Gov. Jindal's denying healthcare to 242,000 people"

Believe whatever fairy tale you like but Move On. org has every right to satirize and parody the aforementioned "Pick Your Passion" brand. This is about Bobby (the murdering Republican) Jindal. Absolutely.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Check your reading skills.

I did not do anything of the sort.

As usual.

Yeah, sure, you didn't. Just another case of you being misunderstood. It must be hard to go through life so misunderstood. Oh, wait, no I think you like it. Gives you that ever sought after opportunity to act superior.

What is 'as usual' is your refusal to acknowledge how your posts come across. But, I do understand that you'd rather play the victim. Go ahead, you enjoy it so much.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org


clip this post email this post what is this?
see most clipped and recent clippings

Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on
Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 15:17

Check your reading skills.

I did not do anything of the sort.

As usual.

Yeah, sure, you didn't. Just another case of you being misunderstood. It must be hard to go through life so misunderstood. Oh, wait, no I think you like it. Gives you that ever sought after opportunity to act superior.

What is 'as usual' is your refusal to acknowledge how your posts come across. But, I do understand that you'd rather play the victim. Go ahead, you enjoy it so much.

*

I guess you'd rather concentrate on your slamming skills rather than your reading skills.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 15:17

"...It must be hard to go through life so misunderstood. Oh, wait, no I think you like it. Gives you that ever sought after opportunity to act superior.

What is 'as usual' is your refusal to acknowledge how your posts come across. But, I do understand that you'd rather play the victim. Go ahead, you enjoy it so much."

Well, that's arrogant. Paragraph #1 is pure nastiness; paragraph #2 is a blend of arrogance (it's Demi's fault that Jill cannot comprehend what Demi says because Jill refuses to acknowledge that there are other ways of thinking outside of Jill's small world) and more nastiness.

I don't know how Demi has the patience to keep digging deep in efforts to explain herself to those who misconstrue her statements. I do understand why she does it though; there are those here who seem gleeful if their misstatements are not contradicted. They proceed to embellish until whatever was originally said bears no recognition at all to what they have decided was actually meant. On the other hand, if Demi does make the considerable effort to attempt to explain, she's pegged as playing the victim.

It's a lose-lose for everybody IMO.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"I don't know how Demi has the patience to keep digging deep in efforts to explain herself to those who misconstrue her statements"

At what point, in your mind, is it not us misconstruing her statements? When does she take "personal responsibility" for what she says? When is it not our fault, but hers for being so misconstrued?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Thanks, Elvis.

It's a sad little game played, isn't it?

Me calling out people for intentionally misrepresenting what I say, falsely attributing stances to me, then when I call this out, I'm accused of wanting attention and playing victim. Then the insults and taunting, and deflection.

No one buys it.

We all know the deal.

I've been a crusader against this type of behavior all of my life.

This is nothing.

This post was edited by demifloyd on Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 23:42


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"I've been a crusader against this type of behavior all of my life.

This is nothing."

For someone that is so appalled by being called a martyr, that line is priceless.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by frank_il z5Illinois (My Page) on
Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 23:45

"I've been a crusader against this type of behavior all of my life.

This is nothing."

For someone that is so appalled by being called a martyr, that line is priceless.

*

Well enjoy it Frank.

Glad I can give you something to do.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Well enjoy it Frank."

Oh, I am Demi. I always do.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Doesn't take much, does it?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Doesn't take much, does it?"

Ohhh, and you still feel the need to get the last word. Classic Demi. You are terribly predictable, aren't you?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Not as much as you, Frank. ;)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Point in fact. The lawsuit is not about the Governor. It is about infringement of trademark. That is illegal. I'm pretty sure the staff at MoveOn.org knows it, too. They will lose this one in court.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

from demi: "Me calling out people for intentionally misrepresenting what I say, falsely attributing stances to me, then when I call this out, I'm accused of wanting attention and playing victim. Then the insults and taunting, and deflection.”

If this has happened again and again, don’t you think there is a reason? Don’t you think you might play a part in your own martyrdom?

You don’t have to answer, of course--elvis will be around in a minute to rub your back and try to console you.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Sleeplessinftwayne, I think you're just wrong and I gave very practical reasons why in an earlier post.

Even the original link mentioned "Keith Werhan, constitutional law professor at Tulane University Law School, said last week suits of this sort are usually unsuccessful: "The government can't legally silence those who are criticizing them."

-----------------------------------As we recently discussed, it was just December when Phil Robertson, one of the stars of a reality-television show called “Duck Dynasty,” made a series of offensive comments during an interview. A&E, the network that airs the reality show, decided to suspend him over his bigoted remarks.
Jindal immediately leapt to Robertson’s defense. For a private business to suspend an employee, the governor said, was an affront to the “First Amendment.” As a constitutional matter, this was gibberish, but the far-right governor dug in anyway, positioning himself as a free-speech absolutist " Americans must be able to communicate whatever message they please, without exception or consequence.
“The politically correct crowd is tolerant of all viewpoints, except those they disagree with,” Jindal said. “This is a free country and everyone is entitled to express their views.”
As the Jindal administration now sees it, when a television network suspends an employee, it’s an outrageous First Amendment violation, but when a state government tries to restrict political speech on a billboard, that’s fine.
Jindal sees himself as a champion of free speech in the private sector, while balking at free speech in the public sector. And given the relative silence from the right over the last few days, it appears many of the conservatives who couldn’t wait to defend Phil Robertson’s right to speak his mind aren’t nearly as concerned about MoveOn.org’s ability to make a policy point on a billboard.------------
( it gets better)
--------------------------------------------------------------
(from MoveOn.Org)

In Louisiana, MoveOn’s new TV ad, which will air in Baton Rouge, criticizes Governor Bobby Jindal’s decision to block Medicaid expansion and deny more than 242,000 Louisianans access to affordable health care coverage. The ad drives viewers to the parody website,www.JindalCare.com, which points out that Governor Jindal’s alternative to Medicaid expansion is to provide no health care at all to more than 242,000 Louisiana residents. MoveOn members will be on the ground in New Orleans on Wednesday with an eight-piece brass band to enroll members of the public in “JindalCare.”

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by sleeplessinftwayne z4-5 IND (My Page) on Sat, Mar 22, 14 at 15:30

"Point in fact. The lawsuit is not about the Governor. It is about infringement of trademark. That is illegal. I'm pretty sure the staff at MoveOn.org knows it, too. They will lose this one in court."

Agree. I said so on Monday, but I erroneously said "copyright" instead of "trademark." That's what this is about, nothing more or less.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It's not illegal if it hasn''t been tried in court. The laws are pretty protective of the use of parody and satire - 1st amendment and all that. Move On. org is so sure of themselves that they are putting out t.v. ads.

"They will lose this one in court" ... I doubt it!

Personally I think Jindal is the one who should be prosecuted.

"Jindal Care" = Bobby Jindal just doesn't care.

Here is a link that might be useful: link to t.v. ad


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues MovedemiOn. org

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 6:52

According to the analysis below, Moveon.org's use of the state's tourism trademark is probably safe. Even if the use were struck down, though, Moveon's billboards and TV ads, and now Louisiana's lawsuit, should have brought enough attention to the issue to make it worthwhile.

"Can You Use a State's Motto in a Parody?

While the use of Louisiana's mark and motto in this ad is seemingly deliberate, the billboard doesn't seem to be poaching the state's business -- it's making a statement about Gov. Jindal's stance on Medicare.

Federal courts have protected satirical or parody pieces from Lanham Act claims before, in many cases because the offending pieces' authors were not actual competitors seeking to deceive consumers by using trade or service marks. The claims made by Dardenne make a very fine distinction to sidestep this fair use exception for parody: Parody comments on the original author's works, but Gov. Jindal wasn't the author of the "Pick Your Passion" mark.

This seems to be a very thin reed upon which to attack a parody or fair use defense. Courts have protected several non-commercial "parody" uses of registered marks, even when the parody is used to make a political statement."

Here is a link that might be useful: Attorney Snider's take


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on
Sat, Mar 22, 14 at 17:44

from demi: "Me calling out people for intentionally misrepresenting what I say, falsely attributing stances to me, then when I call this out, I'm accused of wanting attention and playing victim. Then the insults and taunting, and deflection.”

If this has happened again and again, don’t you think there is a reason? Don’t you think you might play a part in your own martyrdom?

You don’t have to answer, of course--elvis will be around in a minute to rub your back and try to console you.

*

----How smarmy, Pidge.

-----Ummm, let's see, Pidge.

Here is my first post on this topic:

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 10:16

Posted by jodik 5 (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 10:03

So, the Governor of Louisiana would be willing to spend taxpayer money on protecting a logo, but not on the health care of his constituents?

*

Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation.

Jindal isn't against healthcare to citizens of this state.
Keep in mind that Obama's way is not always THE way
to accomplish anything.

"We will not allow President Obama to bully Louisiana into accepting an expansion of Obamacare. “We have rejected Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in Louisiana because it would cost Louisiana taxpayers up to $1.7 billion over the next ten years and move nearly 250,000 Louisianians from private coverage to Medicaid. “The disastrous rollout of Obamacare is a case in point that we don’t need top-down, one-size-fits-all federal mandates, and instead should continue to focus on health care solutions that make sense for Louisiana. “Obamacare needs to be repealed. The dysfunction of the website and the President’s broken promises on being able to keep your health plan are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the problems with this law.”

----Here is my second post on this topic, in response to jillinnj's accusing me saying something I did not say in my first post:

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 18:22

Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 17, 14 at 13:27

"Sorry, only idiots would believe this bogeyman characterization of the situation."

Jindal, and anyone that agrees with not expanding medicare for poor people so they can receive health care, should be ashamed of themselves. And not call people that think poor people should have access to healthcare idiots.

*

Check your reading skills.

I did not do anything of the sort.

As usual."

*

----SO, Pidge--what we have is this:

----I gave my opinion on the topic.

----Jillinnj suggested I be ashamed of myself along with Bobby Jindal, and " And not call people that think poor people should have access to healthcare idiots."

-----I posted to point out that I did in fact NOT do this.

----Of course a lot of people that think poor people should have access to health care. I am one of them. None of us are neccesarily idiots.

----If jillinnj had applied reading comprehension as I suggested, she would plainly see in black and white text what I said and so would you--there were qualifiers and I did in fact NOT make that statement as she posted.

----Then THIS happened, Pidge--jillinnj responded to me pointing out her intentional mischaracterization of my post--by getting personal, and nasty:

Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on
Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 15:17

"Check your reading skills.

I did not do anything of the sort.

As usual."

Yeah, sure, you didn't. Just another case of you being misunderstood. It must be hard to go through life so misunderstood. Oh, wait, no I think you like it. Gives you that ever sought after opportunity to act superior.

What is 'as usual' is your refusal to acknowledge how your posts come across. But, I do understand that you'd rather play the victim. Go ahead, you enjoy it so much.

*

----Then, Pidge, Elvis posted to explain what was happening.

----Then, Frank weighed in, quoting Elvis in the beginning of his contribution to this thead:

" Posted by frank_il z5Illinois (My Page) on
Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 23:35

"I don't know how Demi has the patience to keep digging deep in efforts to explain herself to those who misconstrue her statements"

At what point, in your mind, is it not us misconstruing her statements? When does she take "personal responsibility" for what she says? When is it not our fault, but hers for being so misconstrued?

*

----Then--Lookee here--the gang is piling up, the groundswell begins, posters are licking their chops, they have a little group now to jump on me--

----In response to Elvis, I posted:

"
"I've been a crusader against this type of behavior all of my life.

This is nothing."

From Frank, again:

" Posted by frank_il z5Illinois (My Page) on
Fri, Mar 21, 14 at 23:45

"I've been a crusader against this type of behavior all of my life.

This is nothing."

For someone that is so appalled by being called a martyr, that line is priceless.

*

----Then, PIDGE, Frank stirring the pot, I try my best to be gracious with this post:

"Well enjoy it Frank.

Glad I can give you something to do."

----After a few more remarks by Frank, who obviously wants a response from me by continuing, I end with this post:

"Not as much as you, Frank. ;)"

I wink and a smile.

----THEN, PIDGE, you post this, pulling up something I did not say on this thread, again stirring the pot:

" Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on
Sat, Mar 22, 14 at 17:44

from demi: "Me calling out people for intentionally misrepresenting what I say, falsely attributing stances to me, then when I call this out, I'm accused of wanting attention and playing victim. Then the insults and taunting, and deflection.”

If this has happened again and again, don’t you think there is a reason? Don’t you think you might play a part in your own martyrdom?

You don’t have to answer, of course--elvis will be around in a minute to rub your back and try to console you."

*

You, Pidge, and Frank are calling me a martyr, and then the smart aleck taunting about Elvis coming "around in a minute to rub your back and try to console you."

----NOW--PIDGE--Look at the anatomy of this insipid exchange and diversion from the topic.

Look at it.

All because I gave my opinion, jillinnj intentionally misrepresented what I said, I told her to read and corrected the mischaracterization, and then Frank and now you, PIDGE, started in on me making a big deal over what?

Nothing but an attack on me for giving my opinion and standing up for what I said, not letting someone else falsely redefine what I said and then criticize me for something I did not say.

You just can't wait to try and find any little opening to make personal taunts and nasty comments to and about me, can you?

I can't believe any reasonable person would spend their time with this tripe.

People want to read the thread, not about me.

So don't misrepresent what I say, don't personally insult me, don't continue with taunts and we won't get these distractions.

The anatomy of the tired and oh so predicable game is set forth right here in this post.

If I were the ones making those posts in response to someone giving my opinion and standing up for the truth of what I said, I would be the one that is ashamed, I can tell you that.

It is sad that you just can't find anything better to do.
I am only a person with an opinion, like anyone else.

I have good points and not so good points, like anyone else.

I'm not interested in tearing down or criticizing or taunting any of you--but make no mistake, I will not let that stand done to me. The fact that I don't doesn't make me a martyr or anything else--it makes me not a doormat.

So, waste your time if you want, I don't like wasting this time.

I have to go finish my taxes now.
Something almost half of the country doesn't have to do.
Unless they're getting "earned" income credit.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Good grief.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

From somewhere in the above philippic:I can't believe any reasonable person would spend their time with this tripe. (Keyword being "tripe".)

Then why do you continually do this kind of time wasting thing?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 11:37

I'll say.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Because I won't let the barbs stand, duluthinbloom.

I don't want to waste my time on retorts.

But I've ignored them in the past and it only emboldens those who want to engage in this behavior.

See what happens when people allow people to post their opinions without denigrating, taunting or insulting them for having that opinion.

NOTHING happens.

Oh--for the day.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Could ask for a show of hands from those who care about the delight you seem to take in all this, but feeding into it is tiresome too.

That's my take on this. Just my opinion which hardly warrants any response.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I think I've got this figured out. You folks who have this truly unfortunate habit of denigrating Demi, Mrs, City, Brush, Sleepless, me and sorry if I left anyone out, have a short attention span for the here and now and fuzzy and selective memories of the past.

Ah, well. It's entertainment after all. Not solving any important issues here and certainly no converts are being acquired by anybody.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Good grief indeed.

I do like the word “philippic,” duluth. Nicely done.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Thanks. There are some words you just don't have occasion to use often.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on
Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 13:27

Good grief indeed.

I do like the word “philippic,” duluth. Nicely done.


Posted by duluthinbloomz4 zone 4a (My Page) on
Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 13:36

Thanks. There are some words you just don't have occasion to use often.

*

If you had used the word correctly it would have been cute.

Stating facts is not "phillipic."


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

There was a week or so that these types of threads were non-existent as was noted at the time. It was nice while it lasted.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

SOB

My eyes crossed before I got even a quarter of the way through all the repetitions and repeats. Think I'll rest them and go look at some newly opened daffodils--love that sunshiny yellow.

You know, it is simply her way of clogging up the system--you know, like shutting down the bridge going into New Jersey--throw HT into overload and break it down. It's a deliberate tactic on her part--sabotage all HT threads so they can't go anywhere productive. Then sit back and sneer at all those frustrated liberals.

She's playing perpetual games with us.

Kate

This post was edited by dublinbay on Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 14:24


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

After reading an entire thread repeated several times, I've become an even more staunch believer in abstracting and quoting that core nugget on which to debate.

Took a break and read the lemon bar post on the "Most Recent" feature (gone by already). Lemon zest, no zest; bottled lemon juice, real squeezed lemons. It's a poser.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

For a bunch of supposed relatively intelligent people, it's sad that this must be spelled out so simply.

If one is tired or irritated or annoyed or bored with the way in which many threads go down, here's the solution.

When one offers their opinion or thought or belief on a particular matter, don't presume or assume or play the Amazing Kreskin with intent or motive or meaning.

If you're unsure about a statement, ask for clarification.

Problem solved.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

unless. of course, the other poster is deliberately trying to misunderstand what was said so that that poster has an excuse to play the martyr game and at the same time irritate everybody else on the thread. Oh what power!

Kate


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Good grief, Kate. You're playing "the Amazing Kreskin" right there:

•Posted by dublinbay z6 KS (My Page) on Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 15:49

"unless. of course, the other poster is deliberately trying to misunderstand what was said so that that poster has an excuse to play the martyr game and at the same time irritate everybody else on the thread."

You KNOW this "of course." You KNOW what the "other poster" is deliberately trying to do. You can determine their deliberation (intent), their motive, and the result as well. You are all-seeing, all powerful. You didn't listen to Hostafrenzy's commonsensical post at all, you are acting like one of those people who can't wait for others to stop talking long enough so that you can tell everyone what is what.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Where's mrskjun? She's usually in there pitching her usual predictable support.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Apparently she was given a ticket to Downtown Disney........I have no idea why.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by dublinbay z6 KS (My Page) on
Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 15:49

unless. of course, the other poster is deliberately trying to misunderstand what was said so that that poster has an excuse to play the martyr game and at the same time irritate everybody else on the thread. Oh what power!

Kate

*

Total Poppycock and a perfect example of hypocrisy--maliciously and publicly assigning false motive to another poster's opinions and reasons for participating on an OPINION forum.

Hostafrenzy--you are right and that is exactly what I have been saying.

This is supposed to be a place for opinions--not smarmy comments, taunting, assigning motives, assessing character traits rand making insults to others who don't share your opinion.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Sigh. I agree with what Kate said:
"You know, it is simply her way of clogging up the system--you know, like shutting down the bridge going into New Jersey--throw HT into overload and break it down. It's a deliberate tactic on her part--sabotage all HT threads so they can't go anywhere productive. Then sit back and sneer at all those frustrated liberals.”

it’s a a sophisticated way of trolling, i think. Obviously it works. For the troll, anyway.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on
Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 18:15

Sigh. I agree with what Kate said:
"You know, it is simply her way of clogging up the system--you know, like shutting down the bridge going into New Jersey--throw HT into overload and break it down. It's a deliberate tactic on her part--sabotage all HT threads so they can't go anywhere productive. Then sit back and sneer at all those frustrated liberals.”

it’s a a sophisticated way of trolling, i think. Obviously it works. For the troll, anyway.

*

Funny, that troll thing is a reflection quite often of people looking down into the water.

Trolls tend to go about their business till people throw rocks, the troll comes out and then people yell "troll."

Maybe what they say about going backwards into childhood is true.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It isn't hard to see the pattern and the common denominator in all the threads that wind up similar to this one.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"Maybe what they say about going backwards into childhood is true."

LOL, I think so.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 20:01

It semis like conservative members of this forum don't actually discuss the topic on a thread, they just attack the rest of us for not being conservative and whine about how put-upon they are having to deal with evil liberals.

If you are that unhappy, spend more time on the conservative Facebook pages where you will be surrounded by like minded people.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 16:42

"Apparently she was given a ticket to Downtown Disney........I have no idea why."

Do you mean Mrs got banned? How would you know that?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Only because Labrea noticed her missing a while back and someone, I can't recall who, said they had seen some post of her's on a thread that was very "controversial " and then the entire thread was gone.

I really don't know any more than that.......I thought she was on Spring Break with her grandson.....


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Huh. I wondered of course. I noted that Labrea asked where Mrs was, as he apparently expected her to chime in, and no one else ever said a word. Just you.

That's why I remarked on your statement. Mrs is an important poster and will be missed. Hopefully, this is temporary. If someone complained that Mrs was out of line, I think our ranks will soon shrink considerably, as she was quite...restrained compared to several others.

Too bad, this.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Elvis that isn't so.

Labrea mentioned her missing, I said it might be Spring Break and someone said they saw a nasty post from her and then the thread disappeared. I have no idea what it may have been about...I didn't see it.

Quite frankly I don't like your inference. I can tell you straight up that I would be the last person to ever report anyone for anything . I strongly believe that everyone should be allowed to show themselves for who they are and what the believe.

It has happened to me and I have zero respect for cowards that go"tell the teacher" rather than confront me head on.

Edited to add.....

Would the person that mentioned the post and disappearing thread please speak up......searches here are so difficult

This post was edited by chase on Sun, Mar 23, 14 at 23:19


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I remember it being said also Chase, although I dont recall who said it - but as I recall, it was stated that one evening, Lily and Mrsk were going at it with each other and suddenly the thread was gone, and so, apparently, were Mrsk and Lily.
I recall wondering publicly where Lily and Jill were and then someone recounted what they had observed, as stated above.
I took from that observation that perhaps no one reported anyone at all, that instead perhaps administration was online, observed the conversation and dealt with it as they saw fit.

Keep in mind that was merely my impression, drawn from someone else's observation - so what are the odds that I have drawn the correct conclusion? Not exactly favorable....
Who knows what actually happened.

But reporting something to the forum administration might not have taken place at all.

I hope that if there was trouble with the administration, both of them are gone only on a short, temporary basis - if in fact, they *must*
stay away in the first place.
We dont even know if there is an administration issue with either one of them.
For all we know, they might be on vacation together, sunning themselves in Cabo while sipping prettily colored drinks in tall glasses with funny looking fruit hanging over the side of the rims and giggling as they read all of this conjecture. If so, have one on me, girls!

( I really kinda doubt it, but wouldn't it be fun if it were true!)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

mylab, that sounds so foolishly wonderful that I wish I was with them.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Boy, I wish I was somewhere warm sipping boat drinks. The temperature has fallen and we are waiting for the next storm to roll east tomorrow.

I do wish the good people of Louisiana would all have access to health care. It's just unbelievable that politicians would behave like this - holding their citizens hostage for politics and nothing more than politics. And offering them no choices at all.

Jindal deserves to be voted out of office, and soon.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Jindal really is kind of pathetic, I think. Ever since that State of the Union response, which was bad enough, he just sinks lower and lower in my estimation. The only smart thing he said was that the Republicans should stop being the “party of stupid”--and then became the slogan’s poster child.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by pidge z6PA (My Page) on Mon, Mar 24, 14 at 8:00

"mylab, that sounds so foolishly wonderful that I wish I was with them."

At the same time? Really? Well, maybe with enough drinks...


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

That might be what it would take, elvis, but we all probably have more in common than we generally think. I know that mrsk is a crafter and that would be a link because so am I, and lily lives in my state so we’d find something to talk about.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Tue, Mar 25, 14 at 10:18

At the same time? Really? Well, maybe with enough drinks...

Really.

I have plenty of family, friends, neighbors, coworkers, etc., who don't have the same beliefs I have, about many of the issues we discuss on this forum. So I have no doubt I could and would be friends with most, if not all, of the people on this forum should the opportunity arise.

Now, if you are generally not a nice person, that would be a problem.......................but I don't see many people like that on HT.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Wed, Mar 26, 14 at 20:28

In person many other dimensions would become real, not just this flat-screen one most of us need to keep leashed at least part of the time. I'm a nice, giggly drunk and could have a great time speculating about other dimensions and lives of people here over drinks with either Mrskjun or Lily. :)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

"...could have a great time speculating about other dimensions and lives of people here over drinks with either Mrskjun or Lily."

Either/or...that's my point. ;)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I’m a woman of large imagination--I would enjoy both of them including at the same time. It could get a little crazy, I admit, but what the heck..


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

You want fun AND crazy? Come hang with me! ;-)

Never a dull moment in my world, no alcohol needed!


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Okay, Jodi, but you won’t mind if I bring a bottle of wine, will you?


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

•Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 24, 14 at 8:32

I do wish the good people of Louisiana would all have access to health care. It's just unbelievable that politicians would behave like this - holding their citizens hostage for politics and nothing more than politics."

Not sure it's all just "politics." I think it's about money. What's gonna happen in five years when the feds stop the funding? You will expect the state to go into more debt and pay up.

I know WHO will be paying for it. Working people. We will be robbed of pension funds, have benefits cut, and income taxes will be raised. That's how. Oh, and let's not forget property tax increases. Can't forget that.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by october17 5chgo (My Page) on
Tue, Apr 1, 14 at 7:57

•Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 24, 14 at 8:32

I do wish the good people of Louisiana would all have access to health care. It's just unbelievable that politicians would behave like this - holding their citizens hostage for politics and nothing more than politics."

Not sure it's all just "politics." I think it's about money. What's gonna happen in five years when the feds stop the funding? You will expect the state to go into more debt and pay up.

I know WHO will be paying for it. Working people. We will be robbed of pension funds, have benefits cut, and income taxes will be raised. That's how. Oh, and let's not forget property tax increases. Can't forget that.

*

Exactly October.

Not doing things Obama's way doesn't mean you don't care.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Its sure a good thing poor people never get infectious diseases - H1N1 flu, drug resistant TB, etc - and spread them to rich people. I mean, its not like the rich ever breathe the same air or touch the same surfaces as the guy cleaning the toilets at the Ritz or something.

But then its far, far better to have insurance, spend 2 weeks in the ICU, and only have a few permanent scars and tissue damage than pay a bit more in taxes to avoid getting infected in the first place.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Exactly David.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

How do the uninsured people in the States that did not extend Medicaid get health care? I assume they aren't dying in the streets.

Doesn't the tax payer pick up the tab in the end ?

When they get sick aren't they likely to end up on welfare becasue they can''t work?

Doesn't it make more sense to allow them access to healthcare before they become really sick ? Preventative care is cheap....treating illness not so much.

I really don't get it. I am more than glad to pay a bit more in my taxes so that my fellow citizens have access to education and healthcare...... In the end both pay off.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

That is the major difference I see between American's and Canadians. Even our more conservative Canadians are happy to pay more in taxes to have health care for everyone.

The US could have and should have put universal health care into effect years ago. They are more than 50 years behind us and other countries when it comes to health care. Not something to be proud of.

We might pay more in taxes in Canada, but then again, no one in Canada is putting out 100's or 1000's of dollars every month for health care premiums or going bankrupt because of a major illness.

~Ann


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I don't think canada has the same problems as we do. What generation of baby mamas are you guys on up there? What is the percentage of lifetime-unemployed you all are so HAPPY to pay for? How many do you have scamming disability up there? Do you have SSI up there? Is it enough to live comfortably on just that amount?

Just asking.

•Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Tue, Apr 1, 14

How do the uninsured people in the States that did not extend Medicaid get health care? I assume they aren't dying in the streets.
Doesn't the tax payer pick up the tab in the end ? "

Yes.

Doesn't it make more sense to allow them access to healthcare before they become really sick ? Preventative care is cheap....treating illness not so much. "

They do have access. Many don't use it. Don't use the birth control. Diabetics don't take care of themselves. Etc. etc.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Add that is THE major problem with health care in the States.......got it!


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

It's enough.

Should the roughly half of the people that pay federal taxes in this country be responsible for footing the bill for the education, the health care, the shelter and food of everyone else just because they are human beings, regardless of their situations in life, or regardless of the reasons they don't provide for themselves?

That issue hasn't been decided in this country.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Better question is why do only half the people pay taxes?

You can be darn sure those that are paying taxes are footing the bill for more people that are richer than them than poorer than them.

I personally know several Americans, wealthy by most standards , that brag about the fact they pay NO or very little income tax........funny how some have no issue with that strata of the 48% .


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Yes, the answer is yes. Because the majority of the 48% are working hard to support their families at low paying jobs. They don't make enough to pay federal taxes.

And the many that complain about these low income earners, that don't make enough to pay federal taxes, are some of the same people that are against a higher minimum wage.

October, there is no reason why the "great" US of A could not have put in a single payer health care plan 50 or 60 years ago.

~Ann


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Should the roughly half of the people that pay federal taxes in this country be responsible for footing the bill for the education, the health care, the shelter and food of everyone else just because they are human beings,

Oh, so none of the 47% pay property taxes, buy health insurance, their own food, and pay for the education of their children.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Apparently not, David... we're all just freeloaders, dontcha know...


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by david52 z5CO (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 10:30

"Should the roughly half of the people that pay federal taxes in this country be responsible for footing the bill for the education, the health care, the shelter and food of everyone else just because they are human beings,"

Oh, so none of the 47% pay property taxes, buy health insurance, their own food, and pay for the education of their children.

*

No, they do.

Some of them.

Some of them don't.

The ones that don't are obviously the ones to which I was referring. And some of the ones that do pay their own way but aren't contributing to the federal tax base are constantly whining about someone that does pay federal taxes is not doing enough.

I think we could solve our deficit by instituting a WHINE TAX.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

And then there are those constantly whining about footing the bill for others with their tax dollars.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

That is a very good point Chase, but some people are oblivious.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 12:08

And then there are those constantly whining about footing the bill for others with their tax dollars.

They should double the whine tax on these whiners. Give them something to really whine about.

~Ann


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 12:08

And then there are those constantly whining about footing the bill for others with their tax dollars.

*

Yes, some but not all--only the ones capable of doing for themselves that which they refuse to do.

The takers don't have anything to whine about, they're getting something for nothing.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

However the reference is always to the 47% which contains many, many including the working poor who are legitimately taking the earned income credit.

People who are capable and are taking care of themselves and taking legitimate tax deductions...as we all do.

As demonstrated by comments like this.......

" I have to go finish my taxes now.
Something almost half of the country doesn't have to do.
Unless they're getting "earned" income credit."


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 12:59

However the reference is always to the 47% which contains many, many including the working poor who are legitimately taking the earned income credit.

People who are capable and are taking care of themselves and taking legitimate tax deductions...as we all do.

As demonstrated by comments like this.......

" I have to go finish my taxes now.
Something almost half of the country doesn't have to do.
Unless they're getting "earned" income credit."

*

You have no doubt seen many, many times where I have advocated EVERYONE with income should pay some tax.

I don't agree with the tax laws as written.

My representatives knows this but nothing is being done to rewrite and simplify the tax code.

I've never said that anyone is doing anything illegal but not paying taxes they don't owe.

I only contend they SHOULD owe them and I have also enumerated reasons why it's bad that almost half don't contribute to the federal coffers and why it is important that almost everyone have "skin in the game."

Many, many times.

But of course you knew that.

So keep making points that don't address and reflect my stance if you want, although I thought I saw where you were done with me. Supposed to be, anyway.

I'm too busy and it's boring.

But of course you knew that.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I absolutely agree that you have made that point many times and I think it is a perfectly valid perspective. Not one I hold but absolutely valid.

However, that is not the tax system that the US operates under. It makes large use of deductibles.

My only point is that these are legitimate deductions and people that take them should not be disparaged any more than Romney should be for all his legitimate deductions.

The tax laws is the problem not the 47%


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 14:12

My only point is that these are legitimate deductions and people that take them should not be disparaged any more than Romney should be for all his legitimate deductions.

*

I think what you may be missing from the assessment of my position is that I have repeatedly said I support help for those that can't do better, literally.

It's those that are in that 47% that ARE physically and mentally able to do something to earn more money, that just don't, but yet expect others to compensate for their life CHOICES.

Now--it's their right to live their lives as they wish--and if someone wants to live in a little tiny house and live off the land, or work two days a week and they can live a happy life like that without the boundaries of our laws--more power to them!~

It's the people that do not pay any income tax on any income, and are RECEIVING federal dollars--be it from social programs, or social security disability (I just read somewhere the other day there is finally movement to cut out fraud, somewhere in the Northeast I think)
dollars when people are perfectly able to work at some job, even computer work if they are home bound, and expecting others to subsidize their lives but not willing to pick up and move somewhere to get a better paying job. The permanent takers and non-contributors to federal income tax.

Of course it's legal, and of course I have said many times I want no deductions, flat rate, although I would consider supporting a graduated tax for certain income levels.

But everyone with income should pay if I had any say in it, no deductions, no "earned income credits" just flat paying your part and contributing and get rid of the scores of people on social security disability that get out and about, drive, do yard work, read, are intelligent, and just won't work. I talked with a friend yesterday and I asked about a family member of his that had been ill and he said he had recovered, that he could actually work but decided to just live off social security disability. He was disappointed because he grew up when people had a sense of pride where there is now entitlement.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Well perhaps then it would cause less confusion on all our parts if you referred to the small subset of the 47% that bother you. rather than refer to them as" the 47%"

That small subset likely bothers all of us.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I've place qualifiers on that for years and years and years.

Only new posters wouldn't know the difference.

I'll tell you what--I will try to remember to type "approximately 47% of those that can but won't."


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I tried.....done and done.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Well, its a free country, and if those slackers you whine about all the time bother you that much, ease off tugging, I say, those boot straps.

Heck, take the boots off, pop your feet up on the magazine table, turn on the Jerry Springer show, and lower you income to the point you too can join those bums who pay no taxes. Grab a bag of fired pig skin, lean back and yell at the villains on daytime TV.

/Jerry!! Jerry!! Jerry!!


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Posted by david52 z5CO (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 15:19

Well, its a free country, and if those slackers you whine about all the time bother you that much, ease off tugging, I say, those boot straps.

Heck, take the boots off, pop your feet up on the magazine table, turn on the Jerry Springer show, and lower you income to the point you too can join those bums who pay no taxes. Grab a bag of fired pig skin, lean back and yell at the villains on daytime TV.

/Jerry!! Jerry!! Jerry!!

*

It's an option.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Oh my, that is so sad, demi!


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

Maury! Maury! Maury!


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

You are all-seeing, all powerful.

Finally I agree with something Elvis said. Kate is all-seeing and all powerful. Glad that's settled.

That's all I have time for on this post. I have to go pay my taxes. Oh wait I'm a liberal. Maybe I don't have to do that. I have to go make lunch for the gardener. Or something like that. You know 'cause I'm too busy to post here even though I'm posting ;-)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Take the gardener a gift too - it might be his birthday. :-)


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Just make sure he's not an illegal immigrant.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

What would it matter? Jill's not "running for office for pete's sake..."


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Just make sure he's not an illegal immigrant.

First thing that comes to your mind when you hear gardener, huh? Interesting.

The advice should be to you but I guess you missed the sarcasm in my post.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

My gardener is an ordinary Caucasian American who lives in the next town over. I run into him all the time in the local hoagie shop. But even if my gardener was an “illegal immigrant,” he/she might be happy with a birthday present or any present at all.
Oh, the pettiness.


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

I sleep with my gardener......


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Romney let his go -at least that's what he told America in one of the debates. Hence the quote at 18:43. But most HTers are pretty quick on the uptake. Maybe the "gift" reference would have to be dredged up out of the HT archives now though. :-) However, the inclination just isn't there.


 o
The billboard can stay

A billboard criticizing Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) for his opposition to Medicaid expansion may remain, a federal judge ruled on Monday in a trademark infringement case.

U.S. District Judge Shelly D. Dick ruled Monday that the billboard is permissible, saying that Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne, whose office developed the tourism slogan and sued MoveOn.org, "underestimates the intelligence and reasonableness of people viewing the billboard.”

The State has not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of prevailing on its burden of proving confusion by viewers of the billboard. Furthermore, the State has failed to demonstrate a compelling reason to curtail MoveOn.org.’s political speech in favor of protecting of the State’s service mark," Dick wrote in her opinion. "There has been no showing of irreparable injury to the State.”

Here is a link that might be useful: Link


 o
RE: Bobby Jindal sues Move On. org

Good news, and contrary to the predictions of some.

Whether Dardenne stops here or continues is in question.

Federal judge sides with MoveOn.org in Bobby Jindal billboard lawsuit

Dardenne has not yet decided whether he will move forward with the legal challenge against MoveOn.org. His office cannot appeal Monday's ruling, but can file a request for permanent injunction.

A candidate for governor in 2015, Dardenne said he will discuss the case with counsel Dale Baringer before making a final decision on whether or not to move forward. Baringer has handled the case free-of-charge for the office of the lieutenant governor so far, and Dardenne said he did not expect that to change if he continued with the suit.

One wonders what type of favors Dardenne will owe Baringer should he be elected governor.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here