Perhaps you could take the high road and explain that Sec. Reed isn't QUITE as bad as you're making him out to be.
Posted by Slippery Pete at November 20, 2009 07:41 AMI was going to write more, but what's the point? Partisan Eyman-lovers (such as Eyman) think this is all brilliant legal and political strategy, and nothing I write will persuade them of anything. Everyone else recognizes it for what it is.
Posted by Bruce at November 20, 2009 09:00 AMTwo weeks ago, Judge Hicks agreed with our request and ordered Secretary Reed to not sell 3.4 million names, signatures and home addresses on petitions for $1500 to a for-profit lobbyists for commercial purposes.
Earlier today, however, Judge Hicks agreed with the Secretary of State that discovery can be put on hold while this issue is being considered for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Nonetheless, we believe the public and the press would be better served if Secretary Reed answered the questions sooner rather than later.
Posted by Tim Eyman at November 20, 2009 01:26 PMTim's got standards and the rest of you don't like any standards so SR and the rest hide behind their lawyers with childlike/bunker mentalities...until Tim goes away.
What a waste of good resources by SR attempting to subvert civilization. Pursue civilization and Tim will go away...'no market' for his services.
Posted by Col. Hogan at November 20, 2009 02:29 PMRequest for Confession #1: Admit or deny that you have stopped beating your wife.
Posted by Bruce at November 20, 2009 02:54 PMAnd Jake, if you don't like what Tim is posting, feel free to not read it. Meanwhile, we can kick back and pummel the leftist scum infesting Tim's threads.
Posted by hinton at November 20, 2009 06:48 PMBruce, does your wife (or boyfriend) let you get away with that silly nonsense?
Posted by Amused by Liberals at November 21, 2009 08:25 AMADMIT OR DENY that you have NEVER served in your coutry's armed forces.
Posted by pbj at November 21, 2009 05:58 PMTimmy is an idiot, a jerk, a blowhard, and an hypocrite.
We will not return to the blogcast of the occasional insightful post surrounded by mostly crap.
Posted by Matty at November 21, 2009 06:36 PMHas Sam Reed been officially indicted and charged with anything? No. And that would be the only format warranting direct answers "under oath and under penalty of perjury" (not a lawsuit in a civil trial).
If this were not so, I really could sue anyone and
use it to legally "demand answers". Wouldn't that be a fun world?
Col. Hogan: under this "Eymanism", you would surely get your wish of caves and small huts and roving bands of invaders (oh my!)
Any "law and order" conservatives left out there, or do you all just talk the big talk?
*crickets chirp*
(Note: don't make me sue you and get the answers!)
Posted by mercifurious at November 23, 2009 10:01 AMHas Sam Reed been officially indicted and charged with anything? No. And that would be the only format warranting direct answers "under oath and under penalty of perjury" (not a lawsuit in a civil trial).
If this were not so, I really could sue anyone and
use it to legally "demand answers". Wouldn't that be a fun world?
Col. Hogan: under this "Eymanism", you would surely get your wish of caves and small huts and roving bands of invaders (oh my!)
Any "law and order" conservatives left out there, or do you all just talk the big talk?
*crickets chirp*
(Note: don't make me sue you and get the answers!)
Posted by mercifurious at November 23, 2009 10:54 AMANSWER THE QUESTION:
Did you ever serve in this nation's military???
Posted by pbj at November 24, 2009 11:28 PM