The Evil Dr. Longshadow

Okay, so go out someplace and find some proof that I said the regs define coffee as a soft drink. Because, I did say that beverages either hard or soft are set in two separate columns on the inventory sheets.

What did I lie sbout on the application and how are you so sure that my lawyer and I didn't provide the documents the union had asked for? Do you really think they would approve any application without the documents?

That's because I never said the law defines coffee as a soft drink. Anyway, I'm not the person who posted the regs. All I did was mention the actions that need to be taken in order to comply.

Is photographing a person who is turned away from the camera with no part of the face or any other specific identifiers showing and then posting the photo here still "doxing" that person?

I do have insurance. It's costing me $430 per month for a private policy because my income disqualifies me from any state sponsored plan, including Medicaid. How am I "stealing" from the union when I went through the application process and was approved?

What tax payers? This is the pension plan set up by the union, not the government.

What tax payers? This is the pension plan set up by the union, not the government.

I'm saying that there are many disabled people who don't. There are many others who do. It's their choice.

I'm not required to receive it, even if both my legs have been chopped off.

Again... is receiving SSD or SSI required for all dissbled people?

Is receiving SSD payments required for disabled people? That's hillarious. Did you know that many people are in fact much more seriously fouled up medically than I am and still don't receive one cent from either SSD or SSI? And, why do I need any paperwork from Workman's Comp, Twerkman's Comp or any other Comp when I'm already not working, have not worked for more than a year and still have all my bills getting paid and go around buying Skagens?

Somebody else has already posted the regs and I showed you what those regs cause people to do.

It's missing the clip. Are you saying it won't fire without the clip?

Still denying the relationship between cause and effect?

And do what?

The lawyer on my side sure did. No non disclosure agreements. He would not have accepted the settlement with anything like that in there.

If you want to see a lot of stuff that obviously is not true, go log into Wiki.

It's already spent. There was no non disclosure agreement. I have other money now. It was a big retroactive payment from the union's pension fund.

Nope.

Hmm... Now, let me get this straight. A few members of Congress have just introduced a controversial bill. Regardless of whether or not the bill is passed in both houses of Congress, Trump is already planning to veto it. Congress does not have the two thirds majority required to override the veto. So, is there any point at all to even mentioning the bill, let alone drafting it and introducing it for a vote? Or, is this nothing but some posturing and virtue signalling to a particular voting block for the mid terms and a lame attempt at onboarding a few extra people who are not actually in that voting block?

The regulation HAS BEEN POSTED! You're STILL ignoring what that regulation CAUSES PEOPLE TO DO

It's been said here countless times before, going back years.

The judge didn't see anything fake about the back injury.

So, you deny that laws control behavior.

So, who is "one third taller" than my sixty seven inches?