Take out all the stuff centered around curlcoat, in it only is one page…
Kathleen Sebelius violated the Hatch Act this past spring in a speech to a group in Charlotte. She was there speaking as HHS Secretary, then she "went off script,’ and endorsed President Obama’s reelection and endorsed the Democratic Candidate for Governor of North Carolina.
To her credit, she realized her fuck-up, and had the Campaign reimburse the government for the cost of the trip and other expenses. That doesn’t excuse her massive brane fart to begin with, hence my inclusion here.
I thought the Hatch Act only applied to career civil servants, not political appointees?
Relevant text:
She would fall under 4, no?
I guess the fact that she reclassified her trip and the DNC reimbursed the government instead of just saying “Section 9, subsection 4, biatches!” means for one reason or another she doesn’t qualify.
I got to start my day with a good chuckle. Thanks. 
Yes, which would be us if we bought a new home.
Are you really that dumb or have you not read the thread?
Fuck you. I didn’t even post to this thread until it was multi-paged, and it is certainly not my fault that idiots like you make it look like it’s centered around my one post.
The epic ignorance and vapid stupidity you bring to a thread is generally worth noting upon.
Now why not scrounge around for paper towels and get yourself a nice lunch?
So rent if property tax is something you can’t afford. It’s not our fault if you can’t be bothered to solve your own problems. It’s really revealing, though, how when it’s other people, it’s their own fault but when it’s you, there are always extenuating services.
Hell, I almost asked Curly to post a pic of her bare ass!
[sub]and I voted for Ralph, that one time…[/sub]
“Fundamental attribution error” just about sums up conservative politics.
Heh.
Also services? Was I drunk yesterday? That should say circumstances. Jesus, I never should have left the house.
Jesus Christ, is it that you can’t read or you don’t understand the written word? No where have I said that was can’t afford our property tax, and I have specifically told you that we live within our means and can afford to pay our bills. Try reading instead of just making shit up - again, if your argument is so weak that you have to make up stories, maybe you should quit trying?
So what are you drowning in, then? What taxes are so onerous on you?
Dog semen?
Yeah, Babe, your arguements are so forceful, so compelling, so damned RIGHT, that we have to make shit up in order to mount a feeble counter-argument:rolleyes:
Suffice it to say, you and I live in the same state, but I don’t recognize *your *California, and I wish you’d move or STFU. Failing that, how about you post only about ideas for awhile, and try to keep your personal narrative discreet for awhile.
Thanks.
Okay, eww.
Yes it is, but i’m not sure how that rebuts or contradicts anything i said.
Yes it is, but i’m not sure how that rebuts or contradicts anything i said.
42fish expressed some doubt that one could pay more property taxes in a cheaper house. I was simply pointing that in California it is, in fact, possible to sell your house, move into a smaller and cheaper house, and still end up paying more in property taxes.
ETA: Sorry for the double-post. Screwed up editing.
I was looking at it from the point of view of the property already owned as opposed to the property one is looking to buy.
Are you saying curlcoat should have considered what here property taxes would be in 2012 when she bought the house in 1985or whenever?