So is a judgement a judgement?? District 19, again

naturegirl

naturegirl

Rolling down the highway
Is a judgement against someone different because excuses can be made?? Apparently the Morrison's have two judgements against them and so does Paulette?? Why didn't they bother to mention this?? Why would the Morrison's hide this?? Is it any different because of "who" someone is??

I'm sorry I just don't see the difference.

Carruth's judgement's are OK because times are tough?? Let me tell you I know how tough times are, I have a construction field business but I don't have any liens or judgements against me. (for now anyway :pray)

I just don't understand double standards, how is it alright for some but not others.

I'm not a Paulette supporter and I don't even live in 19 but my business is there.

Here again is a copy of a judgement against the Morrison's that has been floating all over the place in the last couple of days.






[attachment deleted by admin]
 
Okay, yes. I posted this last night. And yes, entirely on my own, I chose to move it to a hidden area. Mainly, but not only, because I didn't know the source of the liens. I believe the liens are real. If they have been satisfied, then those documents are out there too. If you are willing to bring up Braddock's Xerox debt, then you should have a problem with this being out there and explaining to the public what it is about. After all, it's the Morrison supporters opinion that "we have a right to know".

I haven't talked with Mrs. Braddock about her Xerox debt, but do you know how EXTREMELY rare it is that a judge will impose attorney fees upon ANOTHER attorney??? That tells me right off the bat that things ARE NOT as they appear and ARE NOT how the Morrison and James camps would have the public believe.
 
:thumbsup
Madea said:
Okay, yes. I posted this last night. And yes, entirely on my own, I chose to move it to a hidden area. Mainly, but not only, because I didn't know the source of the liens. I believe the liens are real. If they have been satisfied, then those documents are out there too. If you are willing to bring up Braddock's Xerox debt, then you should have a problem with this being out there and explaining to the public what it is about. After all, it's the Morrison supporters opinion that "we have a right to know".

I haven't talked with Mrs. Braddock about her Xerox debt, but do you know how EXTREMELY rare it is that a judge will impose attorney fees upon ANOTHER attorney??? That tells me right off the bat that things ARE NOT as they appear and ARE NOT how the Morrison and James camps would have the public believe.
Click to expand...
 
It is what it is and there are NO EXCUSES as far as I'm concerned.

It's starting to appear that it's a requirement now to run for office that you be in deep financial and legal troubles. I guess there a reputation to uphold?
 
Winchester said:
It is what it is and there are NO EXCUSES as far as I'm concerned.

It's starting to appear that it's a requirement now to run for office that you be in deep financial and legal troubles. I guess there a reputation to uphold?
Click to expand...

Oh dear, you may be right!! :faint
 
Madea said:
Okay, yes. I posted this last night. And yes, entirely on my own, I chose to move it to a hidden area. Mainly, but not only, because I didn't know the source of the liens. I believe the liens are real. If they have been satisfied, then those documents are out there too. If you are willing to bring up Braddock's Xerox debt, then you should have a problem with this being out there and explaining to the public what it is about. After all, it's the Morrison supporters opinion that "we have a right to know".

I haven't talked with Mrs. Braddock about her Xerox debt, but do you know how EXTREMELY rare it is that a judge will impose attorney fees upon ANOTHER attorney??? That tells me right off the bat that things ARE NOT as they appear and ARE NOT how the Morrison and James camps would have the public believe.
Click to expand...

I am concerned about the liens and judgments against anyone running for public office; however, the funds to pay an elected representative's salary don't come from these kinds of funds, they come from our taxpayer's pockets in the form of state income taxes.

I am of the opinion that while it does not bode well for any of our politicians to have any kind of judgment against them, the TAX issue is a much larger issue - this is where the money to fund their paychecks comes from.

I might be right and I might be wrong - simply my opinion but it is not a good thing to cheat anyone or any entity out of money. It is ESPECIALLY not a good thing to cheat the government out of money due to unpaid income taxes, withholding taxes, sales taxes, etc. - especially when you are expecting to receive a paycheck directly from the state government via its taxpayers.
 
BB, I'm not dismissing the tax liens. I am pointing out that those who found it necessary to expose the Xerox debt, the possible contempt, etc. "appear" to be living in a glass house. And, you know as well as I that it is very rare for a judge to impose attorney's fees against an attorney. Honestly, I would love to know the whole story behind that because it is so rare.
 
Madea said:
Okay, yes. I posted this last night. And yes, entirely on my own, I chose to move it to a hidden area. Mainly, but not only, because I didn't know the source of the liens. I believe the liens are real. If they have been satisfied, then those documents are out there too. If you are willing to bring up Braddock's Xerox debt, then you should have a problem with this being out there and explaining to the public what it is about. After all, it's the Morrison supporters opinion that "we have a right to know".

I haven't talked with Mrs. Braddock about her Xerox debt, but do you know how EXTREMELY rare it is that a judge will impose attorney fees upon ANOTHER attorney??? That tells me right off the bat that things ARE NOT as they appear and ARE NOT how the Morrison and James camps would have the public believe.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to say thank you for "how" you moved it. (One less day of crazy for me! :DN)
 
Beach Bum said:
Madea said:
Okay, yes. I posted this last night. And yes, entirely on my own, I chose to move it to a hidden area. Mainly, but not only, because I didn't know the source of the liens. I believe the liens are real. If they have been satisfied, then those documents are out there too. If you are willing to bring up Braddock's Xerox debt, then you should have a problem with this being out there and explaining to the public what it is about. After all, it's the Morrison supporters opinion that "we have a right to know".

I haven't talked with Mrs. Braddock about her Xerox debt, but do you know how EXTREMELY rare it is that a judge will impose attorney fees upon ANOTHER attorney??? That tells me right off the bat that things ARE NOT as they appear and ARE NOT how the Morrison and James camps would have the public believe.
Click to expand...

I am concerned about the liens and judgments against anyone running for public office; however, the funds to pay an elected representative's salary don't come from these kinds of funds, they come from our taxpayer's pockets in the form of state income taxes.

I am of the opinion that while it does not bode well for any of our politicians to have any kind of judgment against them, the TAX issue is a much larger issue - this is where the money to fund their paychecks comes from.

I might be right and I might be wrong - simply my opinion but it is not a good thing to cheat anyone or any entity out of money. It is ESPECIALLY not a good thing to cheat the government out of money due to unpaid income taxes, withholding taxes, sales taxes, etc. - especially when you are expecting to receive a paycheck directly from the state government via its taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Oh deducting taxes from employees and not paying them to the state or fed is a huge no-no!! However, I just don't understand why this stuff from the Morrison's wasn't mentioned. Surepip comes on here and says they owe nothing but this judgement was entered in February. Has it been satisfied??

You know I think the world of you BB, but I just want someone to be honest for once...........I'm so tired of the finger pointing when your own back yard is a mess.

Don't say you owe no one anything unless it's true. I'm extremely disappointed this lie has been told.
 
I look at it this way. The point of this matter is simple...they are trashing Paulette for her business problems and yet, parading the Morrison's and some other candidates around as if they are 100% perfect...and no one is perfect. That is the point of it.

All I have seen is a one-sided bash party and allow only certain information to be let out about one candidate and not of the other two candidates. Fair is fair IMHO.

I also saw the documents and then asked myself, why was this let out of the bag? And then I hear that James didn't report where he got all of his campaign funds.

Then I see some of Paulette's signs missing and other signs of some other candidates breaking the law on where their signs can be placed, especially the 10ft barrier and right of way zones.

If it's good for the goose, then surely it's good for the gander. That is my take on all of this.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.

I could say more but I won't and will keep it to myself.
 
PCGOPExaminer said:
.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.
Click to expand...

jmo.. I do not want Paulette or any one with financial issues running the county

also if they have ran a business poorly why would we again want them to run the county

i be skeerd
 
sadie612 said:
PCGOPExaminer said:
.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.
Click to expand...

jmo.. I do not want Paulette or any one with financial issues running the county

also if they have ran a business poorly why would we again want them to run the county

i be skeerd
Click to expand...

If that is your stand, you eliminate both Braddock and Morrison from this race. And, IMHO, James is an idiot. I'll hold my tongue for now on what I really believe James' role in this race is.
 
Madea said:
sadie612 said:
PCGOPExaminer said:
.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.
Click to expand...

jmo.. I do not want Paulette or any one with financial issues running the county

also if they have ran a business poorly why would we again want them to run the county

i be skeerd
Click to expand...

If that is your stand, you eliminate both Braddock and Morrison from this race. And, IMHO, James is an idiot. I'll hold my tongue for now on what I really believe James' role in this race is.
Click to expand...

i can't and will not vote for any of them.. this race this year is really depressing
idk about James... but it wouldn't be the 1st idiot politician and he would not be the last
 
sadie612 said:
PCGOPExaminer said:
.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.
Click to expand...

jmo.. I do not want Paulette or any one with financial issues running the county

also if they have ran a business poorly why would we again want them to run the county

i be skeerd
Click to expand...

Not only do you eliminate Braddock and Morrison but also Carruth. ;)
 
naturegirl said:
sadie612 said:
PCGOPExaminer said:
.

P.S. No one is ignoring Paulette's "business" economic related financial issues. But my gosh, some don't care to hear her side of everything. Many of those same people have never ran a business in their life but seem to be experts because they say they are.
Click to expand...

jmo.. I do not want Paulette or any one with financial issues running the county

also if they have ran a business poorly why would we again want them to run the county

i be skeerd
Click to expand...

Not only do you eliminate Braddock and Morrison but also Carruth. ;)
Click to expand...
like I said this whole ballot scares me... it is sad!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top