Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #161336 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-03-22 13:40 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-03-24 12:55 +0000 |
| Articles | 10 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-22 13:40 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 08:28 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 08:28 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 08:29 -0700
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-23 13:23 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-22 20:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-23 13:23 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-23 09:42 -0500
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-23 16:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-24 12:55 +0000
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-22 13:40 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Qbasic |
| Message-ID | <PM00052EA32F4EA0DA@aca410ea.ipt.aol.com> |
greymaus wrote: > On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >> >>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >> >> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >> > > > Historically, a President appointed so many people to > office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed > a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. > I forget which. > Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. /BAH
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-22 08:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6b0aa426-257e-4cb6-b1c1-83c5123f7067@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #161336 |
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 7:41:07 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: > greymaus wrote: > > Historically, a President appointed so many people to > > office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed > > a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. > > I forget which. > Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those > would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. There was a link from here to something - apparently Eisenhower had to sign each bond in a new series because of a defect in the legislation, and that put his arm in a sling for two weeks. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-22 08:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c04db208-c511-4e14-bae3-bc666a250c04@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #161336 |
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 7:41:07 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: > greymaus wrote: > > Historically, a President appointed so many people to > > office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed > > a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. > > I forget which. > Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those > would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. There was a link from here to something - apparently Eisenhower had to sign each bond in a new series because of a defect in the legislation, and that put his arm in a sling for two weeks. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-22 08:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fd2ddc82-d1db-4ae9-b64e-21d8dbb0876e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #161336 |
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 7:41:07 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: > greymaus wrote: > > Historically, a President appointed so many people to > > office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed > > a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. > > I forget which. > Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those > would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. There was a link from here to something - apparently Eisenhower had to sign each bond in a new series because of a defect in the legislation, and that put his arm in a sling for two weeks. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-23 13:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052EB732B94DB4@aca40f86.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #161346 |
Quadibloc wrote: > On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 7:41:07 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: >> greymaus wrote: > >> > Historically, a President appointed so many people to >> > office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >> > a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >> > I forget which. > >> Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those >> would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. > > There was a link from here to something - apparently Eisenhower had to sign > each bond in a new series because of a defect in the legislation, and that put > his arm in a sling for two weeks. Yea, I read that post after I answered greymaus' post. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-22 20:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnf39tb.1vn.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #161336 |
On 2016-03-22, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > greymaus wrote: >> On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>> >>>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >>> >>> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >>> >> >> >> Historically, a President appointed so many people to >> office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >> a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >> I forget which. >> > Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those > would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. > > /BAH Well, I started to research the thing,which I should have done at first. http://www.ebay.com/cln/mml1942/postmaster-appointments-presidential/69359837010 Is a sale of postmaster appoitments. According to it, after 1928, postmasters appointments were printed, Hours later, no Joy. Where the hell did I read it. (Postmaster-general seems to have been an important position) -- greymaus . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-23 13:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052EB72EBD7ECF@aca40f86.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #161377 |
mausg@mail.com wrote: > On 2016-03-22, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> greymaus wrote: >>> On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >>>> >>>> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Historically, a President appointed so many people to >>> office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >>> a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >>> I forget which. >>> >> Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those >> would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. >> >> /BAH > > Well, I started to research the thing,which I should have done at first. > > http://www.ebay.com/cln/mml1942/postmaster-appointments-presidential/6935983 7010 > > Is a sale of postmaster appoitments. According to it, after 1928, postmasters > appointments were printed, > > Hours later, no Joy. Where the hell did I read it. > > (Postmaster-general seems to have been an important position) > The post office used to be the dumping ground for [can't think of term] giving paying jobs to people who helped the politiican. That stopped when the PO was spun off from the government. I don't remember when that happened...1970s? /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-23 09:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kpa5fb9qdclr0q1v9alt3tjkvgea7mmoh4@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #161402 |
On 23 Mar 2016 13:23:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >mausg@mail.com wrote: >> On 2016-03-22, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> greymaus wrote: >>>> On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >>>>> >>>>> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Historically, a President appointed so many people to >>>> office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >>>> a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >>>> I forget which. >>>> >>> Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those >>> would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. >>> >>> /BAH >> >> Well, I started to research the thing,which I should have done at first. >> >> http://www.ebay.com/cln/mml1942/postmaster-appointments-presidential/6935983 >7010 >> >> Is a sale of postmaster appoitments. According to it, after 1928, >postmasters >> appointments were printed, >> >> Hours later, no Joy. Where the hell did I read it. >> >> (Postmaster-general seems to have been an important position) >> >The post office used to be the dumping ground for [can't think of >term] giving paying jobs to people who helped the politiican. >That stopped when the PO was spun off from the government. >I don't remember when that happened...1970s? > >/BAH Sophants who donated lots of money to particular politicians. Probably not the correct term either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-23 16:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ncug2v0108k@news4.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #161410 |
On 2016-03-23, JimP <blue@cwahi.net> wrote: > On 23 Mar 2016 13:23:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >> mausg@mail.com wrote: >> >>> On 2016-03-22, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> >>>> greymaus wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >>>>> >>>>> Historically, a President appointed so many people to >>>>> office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >>>>> a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >>>>> I forget which. >>>>> >>>> Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those >>>> would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. >>> >>> Well, I started to research the thing,which I should have done at first. >>> >>> http://www.ebay.com/cln/mml1942/postmaster-appointments-presidential/69359837010 >>> >>> Is a sale of postmaster appoitments. According to it, after 1928, >>> postmasters appointments were printed, >>> >>> Hours later, no Joy. Where the hell did I read it. >>> >>> (Postmaster-general seems to have been an important position) >> >> The post office used to be the dumping ground for [can't think of >> term] giving paying jobs to people who helped the politiican. >> That stopped when the PO was spun off from the government. >> I don't remember when that happened...1970s? > > Sophants who donated lots of money to particular politicians. Probably > not the correct term either. Here in Canada, this oft-used practice is referred to as "patronage". It usually applies to Senate appointments, and serves the added purpose of urging that body to act as a rubber stamp for the ruling party's initiatives - sort of like Supreme Court appointments but less subtle. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-24 12:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00052ECAF8991343@aca40faa.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #161412 |
Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2016-03-23, JimP <blue@cwahi.net> wrote: > >> On 23 Mar 2016 13:23:30 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> mausg@mail.com wrote: >>> >>>> On 2016-03-22, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> greymaus wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 2016-03-21, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 19-Mar-16 18:07, Osmium wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In point of fact *you* falsely claimed that *they* falsely claimed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Historically, a President appointed so many people to >>>>>> office in their last day and hours, and each app. needed >>>>>> a signature, that they couldnt write for weeks after. >>>>>> I forget which. >>>>>> >>>>> Are you sure you're not talking about pardons? Those >>>>> would be signed over time but submitted on the last day. >>>> >>>> Well, I started to research the thing,which I should have done at first. >>>> >>>> http://www.ebay.com/cln/mml1942/postmaster-appointments-presidential/6935 9837010 >>>> >>>> Is a sale of postmaster appoitments. According to it, after 1928, >>>> postmasters appointments were printed, >>>> >>>> Hours later, no Joy. Where the hell did I read it. >>>> >>>> (Postmaster-general seems to have been an important position) >>> >>> The post office used to be the dumping ground for [can't think of >>> term] giving paying jobs to people who helped the politiican. >>> That stopped when the PO was spun off from the government. >>> I don't remember when that happened...1970s? >> >> Sophants who donated lots of money to particular politicians. Probably >> not the correct term either. > > Here in Canada, this oft-used practice is referred to as "patronage". Yea. That's the word I wasnted. Thanks :-) > It usually applies to Senate appointments, and serves the added purpose > of urging that body to act as a rubber stamp for the ruling party's > initiatives - sort of like Supreme Court appointments but less subtle. Quite a few of those appointments in Mass. paid over $100K and the person never showed up for work. Those extremes got the politicians in hot water for a month or two and then the practice would start over again until the next stupido broke the corruption rules. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web