IRS Apologizes For Targeting Conservative Political Groups In 2012 Ele (1 Viewer)

[rockaction]

The fact that this thread is still an issue while there are more important ones that are really a matter of life and death:

Just.Proves.My.Point.

No, it's just another declarative issued by some guy on the internet.

We'll see if an executive agency coordinated with anyone to specifically target people of a certain political persuasion. But we will have to wait.

Oh yeah, the internet. It's not a good thing for you as it appears.

Huh?

You're a twit. Even people in the non-political threads can't stand you.

Good luck.

LOL at efighting words.

Just PM me for my address. Otherwise, you look kinda stupid.

LOL. I knew when you were charging through the threads today you were the one looking for an efight, because everything you've typed has been assholish and bellicose. No surprise here.

Just figured I'd call you on it.

Don't care about your political opinions one bit. Worked a long time in the field.

Wouldn't PM you if I needed a lifeline, you punk.

ROCKnoACTION IS VERY UPSET!

No, I'm laughing.

I'm wondering if you got mixed up with madsweeney somehow.

I just know you were waiting for it, so you've got it. You've been poking around every thread, insulting people and being a ####.

Now you've got bait. So that's that.

 

[drummer]

Saints, you still with these guys? I'd think you'd better find new company to hang with.

 

[drummer]

The fact that this thread is still an issue while there are more important ones that are really a matter of life and death:

Just.Proves.My.Point.

No, it's just another declarative issued by some guy on the internet.

We'll see if an executive agency coordinated with anyone to specifically target people of a certain political persuasion. But we will have to wait.

Oh yeah, the internet. It's not a good thing for you as it appears.

Huh?

You're a twit. Even people in the non-political threads can't stand you.

Good luck.

LOL at efighting words.

Just PM me for my address. Otherwise, you look kinda stupid.

LOL. I knew when you were charging through the threads today you were the one looking for an efight, because everything you've typed has been assholish and bellicose. No surprise here.

Just figured I'd call you on it.

Don't care about your political opinions one bit. Worked a long time in the field.

Wouldn't PM you if I needed a lifeline, you punk.

ROCKnoACTION IS VERY UPSET!

No, I'm laughing.

I'm wondering if you got mixed up with madsweeney somehow.

I just know you were waiting for it, so you've got it. You've been poking around every thread, insulting people and being a ####.

Now you've got bait. So that's that.

Yeah, that's what you think. If you knew how.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The first federal judge is having the IRS employees testify under oath.

There's a second federal judge also involved:

This week, we learn that a second Federal Judge, U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton, has ordered the IRS to appear in his court on the following day, July 11, to explain why the agency should not be required to let an outside expert evaluate the equipment and the situation under which Lerner’s emails were “lost.”

The goal of both hearings is to determine whether emails on the computer hard drives of former IRS official Lois Lerner and of her co-workers who also lost years worth of documents and evidence in what is being billed as a “hard drive crash,” are really beyond retrieval as the agency recently claimed in a Congressional hearing on the matter.

...

http://usfinancepost.com/irs-investigation-reaches-critical-mass-as-two-federal-judges-hold-hearings-on-missing-evidence-20760.html#RYpjVV3K9X7lA8pq.99

 

[drummer]

See, you ask someone to look up something here, and they GET ALL UPSET.

I don't make this up ya know.

 

[Quez]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

 

[drummer]

I'm still waiting for the Lost Lennon Tapes.

 

[MaxThreshold]

The fact that this thread is still an issue while there are more important ones that are really a matter of life and death:

Just.Proves.My.Point.

No, it's just another declarative issued by some guy on the internet.

We'll see if an executive agency coordinated with anyone to specifically target people of a certain political persuasion. But we will have to wait.

Oh yeah, the internet. It's not a good thing for you as it appears.

Huh?

You're a twit. Even people in the non-political threads can't stand you.

Good luck.

LOL at efighting words.

Just PM me for my address. Otherwise, you look kinda stupid.

LOL. I knew when you were charging through the threads today you were the one looking for an efight, because everything you've typed has been assholish and bellicose. No surprise here.

Just figured I'd call you on it.

Don't care about your political opinions one bit. Worked a long time in the field.

Wouldn't PM you if I needed a lifeline, you punk.

ROCKnoACTION IS VERY UPSET!

No, I'm laughing.

I'm wondering if you got mixed up with madsweeney somehow.

I just know you were waiting for it, so you've got it. You've been poking around every thread, insulting people and being a ####.

Now you've got bait. So that's that.

He's as bad as Mad Sweeney. We can only hope that Drummer meets the same fate. Probably best not to respond to his childish antics.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

Lerner is not going to pancake. No sirree.

Now the IT guys, that's whole other matter.

 

[drummer]

The fact that this thread is still an issue while there are more important ones that are really a matter of life and death:

Just.Proves.My.Point.

No, it's just another declarative issued by some guy on the internet.

We'll see if an executive agency coordinated with anyone to specifically target people of a certain political persuasion. But we will have to wait.

Oh yeah, the internet. It's not a good thing for you as it appears.

Huh?

You're a twit. Even people in the non-political threads can't stand you.

Good luck.

LOL at efighting words.

Just PM me for my address. Otherwise, you look kinda stupid.

LOL. I knew when you were charging through the threads today you were the one looking for an efight, because everything you've typed has been assholish and bellicose. No surprise here.

Just figured I'd call you on it.

Don't care about your political opinions one bit. Worked a long time in the field.

Wouldn't PM you if I needed a lifeline, you punk.

ROCKnoACTION IS VERY UPSET!

No, I'm laughing.

I'm wondering if you got mixed up with madsweeney somehow.

I just know you were waiting for it, so you've got it. You've been poking around every thread, insulting people and being a ####.

Now you've got bait. So that's that.

He's as bad as Mad Sweeney. We can only hope that Drummer meets the same fate. Probably best not to respond to his childish antics.

Well, I never called anyone gay just due to their political views like you have, so....

 

[rockaction]

The fact that this thread is still an issue while there are more important ones that are really a matter of life and death:

Just.Proves.My.Point.

No, it's just another declarative issued by some guy on the internet.

We'll see if an executive agency coordinated with anyone to specifically target people of a certain political persuasion. But we will have to wait.

Oh yeah, the internet. It's not a good thing for you as it appears.

Huh?

You're a twit. Even people in the non-political threads can't stand you.

Good luck.

LOL at efighting words.

Just PM me for my address. Otherwise, you look kinda stupid.

LOL. I knew when you were charging through the threads today you were the one looking for an efight, because everything you've typed has been assholish and bellicose. No surprise here.

Just figured I'd call you on it.

Don't care about your political opinions one bit. Worked a long time in the field.

Wouldn't PM you if I needed a lifeline, you punk.

ROCKnoACTION IS VERY UPSET!

No, I'm laughing.

I'm wondering if you got mixed up with madsweeney somehow.

I just know you were waiting for it, so you've got it. You've been poking around every thread, insulting people and being a ####.

Now you've got bait. So that's that.

He's as bad as Mad Sweeney. We can only hope that Drummer meets the same fate. Probably best not to respond to his childish antics.

He wants my address in a PM.

 

[MaxThreshold]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

Lerner is not going to pancake. No sirree.

Now the IT guys, that's whole other matter.

You're right about that: As long as Lerner is protected by Obama, she's never going to flip.

However, if we can get one rat to flip then the floodgates will open up and she would probably be forced to save her own hide.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

 

[drummer]

Never seen so many so called conservatives act like liberals when asked a simple question.

 

[drummer]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exempt status if they are not expecting donations.

 

[drummer]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exmpt status if they are not expecting donations.

Thing is, all these so called organization happened to crop up during the election cycle, and almost anybody can start one. Even Max. None of which I feel need a tax exemption in the first place if it goes towards a political campaign.

Right?

 

[MaxThreshold]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exempt status if they are not expecting donations.

It's great that you gave him a huge can of smackdown here, but you really should stop feeding the troll.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exempt status if they are not expecting donations.

It's great that you gave him a huge can of smackdown here, but you really should stop feeding the troll.

Yeah. You're right.

 

[drummer]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exempt status if they are not expecting donations.

It's great that you gave him a huge can of smackdown here, but you really should stop feeding the troll.

HUGE CAN OF SMACKDOWN.



More proof that Max can't think for himself.

 

[drummer]

Does that make them illegitimate because they may be not around now?

Maybe because they weren't in the first place.

OK, my guess is, like a lot of things political, you don't know what a PAC is. So....why are you so concerned?

And, as usual, you make a lot of incorrect assumptions. I'm just asking where the proof of them being "illegitimate" is coming from.

Here's a list:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

As you can see on this list, there are a lot of SuperPACs that have zero dollars in contributions. Not that they are illegitimate, rather they can be anything like "**** Cheney For A Better America", which has zero dollars in contributions.

Now some info on PACs and filing for tax exemption:

http://www.taxfreecharity.com/politicalactioncommittees.htm

This is where the whole "Social Welfare Program" thingy comes into play.

Do I need to post more? Or can you go back and learn how to read a thread?

This is the post you're speaking of?

It seems like a simple analysis, to see the list of groups targeted by the IRS and then see which ones have any funds flowing through them, but these links don't show it and you don't show it.

I'll tell you this much, if your theory held water a Media Matters or ThinkProg or Kos some other hack site would have covered it by now. But apparently they haven't.

Jeebus, we were questioning this starting on page one of this thread. I know this is all confusing to you, but it boils down to the fact of what is a valid organization and what isn't, and why do they need to game the system if they aren't.

You should be against anything trying to game the system. Right?

And I've had that conversation too, however you were talking about this specific issue. Apparently no one has an answer, but again if none or nearly none of the targeted groups had any funding then I'm sure there would be a left leaning blog post on it. Regardless, groups don't apply for tax exempt status if they are not expecting donations.

It's great that you gave him a huge can of smackdown here, but you really should stop feeding the troll.

Yeah. You're right.

Now you just agreed with Max. I said you needed better company.

 

[drummer]

WE NEED A LEFT LEANING BLOG POST TO WEIGH THIS:

Sincerely,

Saints?

 

[Quez]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

Lerner is not going to pancake. No sirree.

Now the IT guys, that's whole other matter.

She would probably be found dead before she was ever able to squeal.

 

[drummer]

Meanwhile...

https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cycle=2014&cmte=C00456194

ETA: for those wondering what the hell...

https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cycle=2012&cmte=C00456194

 

[Loan Sharks]

Has anybody bothered to find out if these political groups still exist?

The IRS and White House are still there, yes.

I know you're too lazy, but anybody else have an answer?

Lord, Drummer, yes, they exist. How many groups were there, like over 100? A few of them are actively suing the IRS.

No, wait, let's all do this research so we can satisfy Drummer. Let's dig and come up with a list to satisfy his burden of proof, because that sounds fair.

Or, he can look it up himself instead of charging in and asking people to do his work for him.

Actually, I did put up a list earlier a few pages back, but that only proves that you are still too lazy with this.

Yeah I know you put up a list earlier of groups that are now out of business due to the IRS screwing them, I thought you were looking for a new list of the survivors of the attack?

 

[drummer]

Has anybody bothered to find out if these political groups still exist?

The IRS and White House are still there, yes.

I know you're too lazy, but anybody else have an answer?

Lord, Drummer, yes, they exist. How many groups were there, like over 100? A few of them are actively suing the IRS.

No, wait, let's all do this research so we can satisfy Drummer. Let's dig and come up with a list to satisfy his burden of proof, because that sounds fair.

Or, he can look it up himself instead of charging in and asking people to do his work for him.

Actually, I did put up a list earlier a few pages back, but that only proves that you are still too lazy with this.

Yeah I know you put up a list earlier of groups that are now out of business due to the IRS screwing them, I thought you were looking for a new list of the survivors of the attack?

I'm actually requesting a list of posters victimized by this.

ETA: also those who contributed to the fake PACs too!

 

[MaxThreshold]

Has anybody bothered to find out if these political groups still exist?

The IRS and White House are still there, yes.

I know you're too lazy, but anybody else have an answer?

Lord, Drummer, yes, they exist. How many groups were there, like over 100? A few of them are actively suing the IRS.

No, wait, let's all do this research so we can satisfy Drummer. Let's dig and come up with a list to satisfy his burden of proof, because that sounds fair.

Or, he can look it up himself instead of charging in and asking people to do his work for him.

Actually, I did put up a list earlier a few pages back, but that only proves that you are still too lazy with this.

Yeah I know you put up a list earlier of groups that are now out of business due to the IRS screwing them, I thought you were looking for a new list of the survivors of the attack?

No one is really sure what he's looking for. He keeps spouting nonsense. Howeer, there is one thing we can guarantee he's NOT after - the truth.

 

[drummer]

I guess we can ramp up "**** Cheney for a Better America" for the 2016 cycle, since it's dead for the 2014 cycle.

Not that Cheney has done anything better for America (thus it's poor value) but still, we can still see if we can game the system!

 

[drummer]

Has anybody bothered to find out if these political groups still exist?

The IRS and White House are still there, yes.

I know you're too lazy, but anybody else have an answer?

Lord, Drummer, yes, they exist. How many groups were there, like over 100? A few of them are actively suing the IRS.

No, wait, let's all do this research so we can satisfy Drummer. Let's dig and come up with a list to satisfy his burden of proof, because that sounds fair.

Or, he can look it up himself instead of charging in and asking people to do his work for him.

Actually, I did put up a list earlier a few pages back, but that only proves that you are still too lazy with this.

Yeah I know you put up a list earlier of groups that are now out of business due to the IRS screwing them, I thought you were looking for a new list of the survivors of the attack?

No one is really sure what he's looking for. He keeps spouting nonsense. Howeer, there is one thing we can guarantee he's NOT after - the truth.

Have another snack #### Max.

 

[drummer]

Funny thing is if the IRS was targeting Liberal groups (which they had BTW), Max would say it's the Liberal's fault for creating AIDS.

 

[tommyboy]

are you off your meds?

 

[drummer]

are you off your meds?

Are you gonna blow another 3 years worth of family vacations on Otis again?

 

[drummer]

*cracks open beer*

Now that tommyblow is in the room, let's see where this is going.

 

[drummer]

BTW, just in case anybody is wondering:

http://i.walmartimages.com/i/p/00/07/14/39/00/0007143900601_500X500.jpg

Good stuff.

 

[drummer]

BTW, I paid a tax and CRV for this. Maybe I should had started a Rolling Rock PAC so I don't have to pay either.

 

[MaxThreshold]

are you off your meds?

I think he is. He's basically responding to his own posts.

 

[drummer]

are you off your meds?

I think he is. He's basically responding to his own posts.

More evidence on how confused Max really is.

ETA: by indirectly responding to my posts, he is actually responding to them.

That should take him a few hours to figure out.

 

[tommyGunZ]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

Out everyone for what? What is your "theory"?

 

[drummer]

We have to get her to flip somehow and out everyone.

Out everyone for what? What is your "theory"?

Out everyone who is after him.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

at Drummer.....the guy gets off on acting like an ### on a message board.

 

[drummer]

at Drummer.....the guy gets off on acting like an ### on a message board.

I am glad to see you enjoy this.

 

[drummer]

CONSERVATIVES ARE GETTIN UPSET AT DRUMMER. FILM AT 11.

 

[Ookie Pringle]

at Drummer.....the guy gets off on acting like an ### on a message board.

I am glad to see you enjoy this.

Watching unstable nut jobs is always entertaining.

 

[drummer]

at Drummer.....the guy gets off on acting like an ### on a message board.

I am glad to see you enjoy this.

Watching unstable nut jobs is always entertaining.

That really says worse about you than I.

ETA: than again, you're conservative.

 

[drummer]

NOT AN UNSTABLE NUTJOB:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Michelebachmann.jpg

 

[BeaverCleaver]

someone get Drummer his meds!

 

[drummer]

Got beaver in, just as I expected.

IT'S NUTJOB NIGHT IN THE FFA!

See how it's done tim?

 

[drummer]

I can get this to 30 pages easy tonight. Maybe even more.

Just by asking one simple question:

Just how did this affect you personally?

Oops, maybe not.

 

[drummer]

Hey, beaver is still here.

Hi beaver!

 

[BeaverCleaver]