........especially when the racial minority has, in fact, more rights than you or I ever dreamed of having.
That%26#039;s the liberal way. They like to categorize Americans and they constantly point out the differences between people. Divide and conquer method. Pit the poor against the rich, black against white, gay against straight....on and on.
Liberals don%26#039;t like to point out our similarities, that we all have the chance to be successful. No, the victim card must be played at every turn. It%26#039;s kind of sad.
You mean the Natives? I think America is a very diverse country in terms of different people, just don%26#039;t forget what these people did.It%26#039;s like when Americans say, %26quot; don%26#039;t forget the Jewish holocaust%26quot;.
By the way, the Natives were lied to, they%26#039;re still being lied to, so watch out what people spew, it%26#039;s nothing but classless rhetoric.
The liberals power base is the low income uneducated people. (the majority, obama supporters) The Conservatives power base are the educated land owners and business people. ( the people that create jobs for the lower income folk).
so let me get this straight...blacks are 12% of the nation%26#039;s population and you think that we have more rights than you? if you can%26#039;t even solidify the vote of white people that is your own issue. i%26#039;d love to know what rights i have that you do not. could you provide a list of them? can%26#039;t you just go back to your compound and polish your gun? shiny shiny!
Is anybody tired of the constant ranting about race? The only ones who ever bring it up are the ones on the left. Happened all during the campaign and now the left uses it every time some one disagrees with King Obama.
Because they want to help out their People the Black Community well most American Cities will look like Detroit If that ever happens.
%26quot;majority of us%26quot;? Are you hispanic?
gives them more power
They hate all humans who do not think like they do. They grab the weak of mind and tell them what is right and wrong.
Because they use special interest groups to further their own political agendas.
It helps keeping them to get re-elected, doesn%26#039;t it?
libs hate their own race.
They are upset they were born without turd-colored skins.
Because it goes in their favor most of the time.They want the power.
welfare?
bravo Greg!!
It%26#039;s all about buying votes.
Racist much?
They do not.
Why do phony conservative Limbo-cons hate one certain racial minority over the majority of us in America?
You are what people call %26quot;white trash%26quot;.
WAKE UP WHITE PEOPLE!!
(key banjo music)
%0D%0A
Friday, March 27, 2009
What successes did the U.S and NATO troops experience early on?
in the war in afghanistan
the prompt for this essay is why is the us maintaining troops in afghanistan... please answer the question above ;]
they weaked the Taliban enough for them to loose control of the country.
the prompt for this essay is why is the us maintaining troops in afghanistan... please answer the question above ;]
they weaked the Taliban enough for them to loose control of the country.
I got a Speeding Ticket in NY...?
it was $240..and i paid it on time...
i got this other letter from ny dmv saying my new york license is suspended because a failure to pay a driver responsibility assessment, thing is i dont live in NY...and it says 300...WHAT IS THIS? im from Maryland..
do you have proof that you paid it? if so you need to contact the ny dmv and give them the proof. if not, than your pretty much SOL
i got this other letter from ny dmv saying my new york license is suspended because a failure to pay a driver responsibility assessment, thing is i dont live in NY...and it says 300...WHAT IS THIS? im from Maryland..
do you have proof that you paid it? if so you need to contact the ny dmv and give them the proof. if not, than your pretty much SOL
Which US state looks more like a post-apocalyptic wasteland?
or has more probabilities of becoming one?
sort of like Mad Max
I haven't seen Mad Max so I can only imagine two things, either total land with no vegetation (I think about New Mexico, West Texas, Arizona, Nevada) or empty towns with cans blowing down the street (Michigan).
New York,... WHY? If you take away the buildings and roads, well pretty much take away everything that's not alive and LEAVE THE PEOPLE, trees and animals, well there you have it. Millions of potentially hungry people IN ONE TINY AREA!
There are plenty of horror-show towns in the US that look all but abandoned. It goes like this:
Parts of Alabama
Parts of Tennessee
Parts of Missouri and Kansas
Much of New Jersey
It goesm on and on.
Mississippi -- but it has looked like a wasteland ever since the Civil War.
Nevada or possibly Arizona, they're both just huge deserts with cities in random spots
Not a state, but Detroit.
Luisiana near New Orleans looked that way before Katrina
Texas.
Judging from my last visit, it is California.
Cali- for sure, it's becoming a third world country
Texas, Florida, the south (Somewhere hot like hell)
New York or California.
tough call.
nevada
New Jersey
Nevada, for sure. But that's not the fault of Nevadans.
I'll vote Alabama.
sort of like Mad Max
I haven't seen Mad Max so I can only imagine two things, either total land with no vegetation (I think about New Mexico, West Texas, Arizona, Nevada) or empty towns with cans blowing down the street (Michigan).
New York,... WHY? If you take away the buildings and roads, well pretty much take away everything that's not alive and LEAVE THE PEOPLE, trees and animals, well there you have it. Millions of potentially hungry people IN ONE TINY AREA!
There are plenty of horror-show towns in the US that look all but abandoned. It goes like this:
Parts of Alabama
Parts of Tennessee
Parts of Missouri and Kansas
Much of New Jersey
It goesm on and on.
Mississippi -- but it has looked like a wasteland ever since the Civil War.
Nevada or possibly Arizona, they're both just huge deserts with cities in random spots
Not a state, but Detroit.
Luisiana near New Orleans looked that way before Katrina
Texas.
Judging from my last visit, it is California.
Cali- for sure, it's becoming a third world country
Texas, Florida, the south (Somewhere hot like hell)
New York or California.
tough call.
nevada
New Jersey
Nevada, for sure. But that's not the fault of Nevadans.
I'll vote Alabama.
WHAT??? Obama vows to defeat al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan?
This morning he lied again! He bragged about the 17,000 additional troops he's sending to Afghanistan because the generals over there requested them. The lie was the generals actually requested 30,000 additional troops! He's doing as little as he needs to to keep up the image. If our troops could just be allowed to kick butt, we could get out of there quicker. Quit making our soldiers fight with one hand behind their back! Sending less than what is needed is immoral and will kill more soldiers. Obama is a liar! What will it take before the libs are Americans first, instead of an Obama voter?!
Clearly you did not listen to his campaign in 2008... he clearly stated that we needed more troops in Afghanistan. That Al-Quaeda was more concentrated in there and Pakistan.
He never said that he would remove troops from Afghanistan... He said that he would actually increase troops there and move some from Iraq to do that. Now, he did say that he would greatly reduce the troops in Iraq in 18 months from his swearing in.... it looks like he will not be doing that. You can criticize him on that BUT it is unfair to attack him on the Afghanistan propsal.
This is the problem with the base of the GOP: they do not differentiate the two wars. We are occupying 2 separate nations that do not share a border. One (Afghanistan) is coalition of nations where the United States is heading... the other is solely the United States (and some British troops but they have mostly left that theater). Please research this... this is all well publicized and Obama's intentions were also well publicized.
He stated about a thousand times before he was president that he was going to route Al-Qaida.
Pakistan is in a bad situation right they are trying to please America, but also trying to please their own Muslim extremist which isn't working out to well.
In the near future it might be possible that America and Pakistan start clashing swords.
How can you "bring the troops home" when you're fighting a war. Afghanistan is where the fight is. Iraq hasn't been a war since Dumbya declared "mission accomplished", it's an occupation which it's time to end. The president could just ask John McShame how to get bin-Laden since during the campaign McShame said "I know where bin-Laden is".
Throwing away logic and fact are not wise just to take a swipe at the president, makes you appear stupid.
Is there a question here...? This is exactly what he said he would do during the campaign. it seems a whole heck of a lot of people weren't paying attention. That cult of personality blinded millions of people apparently. That's what happens when you pay attention to style rather than substance. Closing Gitmo, wow. Big deal. He's ratcheting up the war machine to cause real damage and anger millions more radicals. Sounds like Bush redux!
Yea he PROMISED everyone he would bring every troop home. Yea bring them home and send them to Afghanistan. Not that I disagree with the war. I support everything our troops have and are doing!!!!
yes president Obama have voe to rid this country of it's real enemies something Bush and Cheney fail at doing over 7 long years .
Sure but when Gates said that under the Bush Administration... It was bad back then! Gotta love hypocrisy.
OOps maybe just maybe he needs to have a deep hearted chat with russia about Afghanistan.
He would first have to resign. Then half our battle would be won.
He IS the god, right...
He is such a tool.
Where do you think al-Qaeda are based?
sure to the sheep he is going to save planet earth
Um, yeah, that is what we wre supposed to be doing in the fist place before Mr.Bush's little diversion.
Clearly you did not listen to his campaign in 2008... he clearly stated that we needed more troops in Afghanistan. That Al-Quaeda was more concentrated in there and Pakistan.
He never said that he would remove troops from Afghanistan... He said that he would actually increase troops there and move some from Iraq to do that. Now, he did say that he would greatly reduce the troops in Iraq in 18 months from his swearing in.... it looks like he will not be doing that. You can criticize him on that BUT it is unfair to attack him on the Afghanistan propsal.
This is the problem with the base of the GOP: they do not differentiate the two wars. We are occupying 2 separate nations that do not share a border. One (Afghanistan) is coalition of nations where the United States is heading... the other is solely the United States (and some British troops but they have mostly left that theater). Please research this... this is all well publicized and Obama's intentions were also well publicized.
He stated about a thousand times before he was president that he was going to route Al-Qaida.
Pakistan is in a bad situation right they are trying to please America, but also trying to please their own Muslim extremist which isn't working out to well.
In the near future it might be possible that America and Pakistan start clashing swords.
How can you "bring the troops home" when you're fighting a war. Afghanistan is where the fight is. Iraq hasn't been a war since Dumbya declared "mission accomplished", it's an occupation which it's time to end. The president could just ask John McShame how to get bin-Laden since during the campaign McShame said "I know where bin-Laden is".
Throwing away logic and fact are not wise just to take a swipe at the president, makes you appear stupid.
Is there a question here...? This is exactly what he said he would do during the campaign. it seems a whole heck of a lot of people weren't paying attention. That cult of personality blinded millions of people apparently. That's what happens when you pay attention to style rather than substance. Closing Gitmo, wow. Big deal. He's ratcheting up the war machine to cause real damage and anger millions more radicals. Sounds like Bush redux!
Yea he PROMISED everyone he would bring every troop home. Yea bring them home and send them to Afghanistan. Not that I disagree with the war. I support everything our troops have and are doing!!!!
yes president Obama have voe to rid this country of it's real enemies something Bush and Cheney fail at doing over 7 long years .
Sure but when Gates said that under the Bush Administration... It was bad back then! Gotta love hypocrisy.
OOps maybe just maybe he needs to have a deep hearted chat with russia about Afghanistan.
He would first have to resign. Then half our battle would be won.
He IS the god, right...
He is such a tool.
Where do you think al-Qaeda are based?
sure to the sheep he is going to save planet earth
Um, yeah, that is what we wre supposed to be doing in the fist place before Mr.Bush's little diversion.
Today, the president of Brazil proclaimed that
crisis." - is this not a 'carbon-copy' of Nazi philosophy?
Actually no it's not.
He is using blue eyed people as a scapegoat.. just like Hitler used Jews as a scapegoat.
It's actually a reverse of Nazi Philosophy.
I personally think this was a very ignorant statement for him to make. Hell! Im blue eyed and white skinned and i never hurt a fly. I guess you could call me a modern day hippie animal activist. Anyway you can't just say that people will this and that feature are ruining this world. Thats unnecessary.
BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! -
Yes i read it and he is so right . I have only seen white haired white men at these banks yes they are behind the incompetence and greed that we have seen in this country .
No the nazis like white blue eyed people and the brazil guy is balming them so it is the inverse sort of. But both were crazy.
funny that the president of Brazil is white
is he a wigger? denying his own race?
He is entitled to any opinion he wants.*
lol, how stereotypical
he is right !!!!!
its the stone cold truth.
how does it feel?
Actually no it's not.
He is using blue eyed people as a scapegoat.. just like Hitler used Jews as a scapegoat.
It's actually a reverse of Nazi Philosophy.
I personally think this was a very ignorant statement for him to make. Hell! Im blue eyed and white skinned and i never hurt a fly. I guess you could call me a modern day hippie animal activist. Anyway you can't just say that people will this and that feature are ruining this world. Thats unnecessary.
BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! - BILDERBERG! -
Yes i read it and he is so right . I have only seen white haired white men at these banks yes they are behind the incompetence and greed that we have seen in this country .
No the nazis like white blue eyed people and the brazil guy is balming them so it is the inverse sort of. But both were crazy.
funny that the president of Brazil is white
is he a wigger? denying his own race?
He is entitled to any opinion he wants.*
lol, how stereotypical
he is right !!!!!
its the stone cold truth.
how does it feel?
Listen up Dems. do you have a problem with obama spending on stimulus and bailouts or do you think its ok?
HONESTLY
"Government does not produce revenue. It consumes it." - Governor Ronald Reagan, Speech, Nov. 14, 1974.
Democrats attack Bush for spending but think its okay if Obama spends 9 times the amount Bush spent
No.
1) The bailouts will be paid back....with interest. A few of the big banks want to do just that right now.
2) Stimulus is still needed in the expanded economy to get money into the system. If it is not done, the economic effects would be much worse.
3) Economists just came out earlier this week and expect the recession to start to turn around by the end of the year. If the stimulus and bailouts were not done, the end wouldn't occur until 2011.
That's as honest as I can be.
Honestly, I'm a capitalist. But once Bush bailed out the rich greedy bankers...You have to bailout everyone else to keep the playing field even.
The banks should have never been bailed out. They should be allowed to fail. The only banks they have saved are the biggest and most corrupt. The small banks get siezed all the time by the FDIC.
Do I agree with Obama's bail outs? Yes, but only because it was preceded by Bank bailouts.
If we are going to bailout the greedy *** bankers, then we should at least bailout our Firefighters, law enforcement, education, and healthcare.
The sad reality of all of this is that....we don't need blanket bail outs (which are only a band aid). We need widespread reform.
But the Bail outs are better than doing nothing...even if they are only a temporary solution.
I believe Obama is light years better than Bush...but keep in mind, the game is still rigged. The average working person still gets screwed. Of course the average person isn't so bright...but that doesn't mean they should be taken advantage of. They should be treated fairly.
Honestly, I actually pay attention.
Bush put us into this horrific mess by wanting to fight his wars, but not raising the funds necessary to pay for them. That forced him to have to borrow the funds necessary to pay for these wars from other countries, at extremely high (and exponentially growing) interest rates.
When Bush got to office, he inherited a $4 trillion National Debt from Bill Clinton. When Bush left office, he left us with a nearly $11 trillion National Debt. That means that Bush managed to spend $3 trillion MORE THAN DOUBLE what ALL 42 of his predecessors needed 224 years to amass.
Bush put us into this mess. Then he trapped us in Iraq for a few months yet; and in doing so also managed to trap us in Afghanistan. We are stuck with his mess, and these expenses continue to be Bush's, not Obama's. Obama cannot save the money necessary to save this economy, because Bush trapped us into continuing to pay for the wars.
So if Obama cannot save money, he is doing the next best thing. He is investing it into our economy, to streamline it so that it can produce more while taking in less. That way, if he cannot save the money, we can instead produce what is necessary to cover what Bush did.
Personally, I would prefer we leave the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars immediately; not 19 months from now. Then we should raise taxes, and move all money saved/raised toward paying down what Bush did so that we can save the dollar. But that is not really practical, and somewhat dangerous since Bush left so many terrorists in Afghanistan so that he could go get revenge for Daddy while satisfying his lust for oil.
So Obama is doing the only real option left. I don't think it's great, but it's all Bush left us with. Perhaps if you guys had remembered Conservatism when it mattered, we would not be stuck in this situation as it is.
Add-on:
And for the record, we have already seen this plan work. Despite what Ronald Reagan said, he was quite the fan of big government. He comes in number 3 on the biggest spenders list, right behind Richard Nixon at number 2 and George W. Bush at number 1.
The difference between Reagan and Bush was that Reagan raised taxes on everyone for the last 7 of his 8 years in office. So he actually covered his spending, whereas Bush did not. That saved the dollar, which in turn saved the economy.
We also saw it in George H.W. Bush's final year in office. His Iraq War had had a similar effect on the economy, destroying the dollar and, in turn, sent us into recession. But his willingness to raise taxes, while having cost him his second term in office, did pay for the first Iraq War and paved the way for Clinton to finish the recovery. That is when we had the good years under Clinton.
We HAVE TO raise taxes to pay for what Bush did. To do that, we have to re-establish the economy and make it produce more so that we can cover everything. It worked for Reagan, it worked for George H.W. Bush, it worked for Clinton.
Then we lower taxes under George W. Bush, and it goes all to h*ll.
So I think I'd rather go with Obama, who is following the first three, rather than following Jr.'s plan--which got us into this mess.
Its not as much the bail outs that I oppose(I think they are a bad Idea too just not the worst one). It is the government taking control of these companies. I don't buy the story that they are putting people in charge who will magically bring life back into these dead companies. If there was someone out their who could don't you think they would have already been hired by the company? The bail outs seem to me just a clever way to disguise the government taking control of private industry. One of the first steps to socialism.
In order to correct Bush's mess, spending is necessary. The republican party of NO SENSE came out yesterday with their economic stimulus plan (14 pages) which says they will triple the tax cuts for the wealthy, triple than what it is now.
Which makes more sense? HONESTLY
Oooooh!! Listen up y'all, 9-12 project has spoken and sound quite huffy too!!
To answer your question, no I do not have a problem with the stimulus. However, as I have always stated, I am not, and was never supportive of the bailout. Hope that calms your nerves a little. *smilin*
i think its fine. because hes also helping us little poor people that never saw help when bush was in office. My family has seen alot of fruits of Obamas labor already....he upped our foodstamps.....and my bfs unemployment was extended and he also recieves an extra 50 dollar check with it now. Hes finally found work again and were getting back on our feet and if Bush or Mccain had been elected we'd still be suffering out here.
He should instead choose to invade another country (preferably a country without WMDs, and which can't defend itself) and spend all the money we don't have there, and double our deficit to boot!
In other words, he should follow in GWB's footsteps.
Want a viable alternative? Every American tax free for 1 year.
OR
Do nothing let the banks and insurance compainies fail and let someone else buy them and give them a workable plan releasing them from bad contracts.
I trust the Democratic party.
Clinton administration pulled us out of the hole the 1st Bush dug.
I beileve the Obama folks can pull us outa this situation created by the Bush repubs again
If I remember how to balance my personal checkbook properly(haven't had enough cash to worry about it recently) it never makes sense to spend money you don't have.
It's OK ! Because i have faith and trust in president Obama he have been brilliant up to this point.
Listen up Con. I have no problem with him fixing this mess at all, so yep it's okay with me.
They're good with it. It was only a problem to them when Bush did it.
See what I mean?
I love it....Obama NEEDS the money for his people.
Can't wait to read these replies.
No, just like Bush.
you can see these m----- s have no brains, they are complete dung wipes
No
Not at all. It does not effect me, whatsoever.
It does not effect the majority of Americans.
Try again.
"Government does not produce revenue. It consumes it." - Governor Ronald Reagan, Speech, Nov. 14, 1974.
Democrats attack Bush for spending but think its okay if Obama spends 9 times the amount Bush spent
No.
1) The bailouts will be paid back....with interest. A few of the big banks want to do just that right now.
2) Stimulus is still needed in the expanded economy to get money into the system. If it is not done, the economic effects would be much worse.
3) Economists just came out earlier this week and expect the recession to start to turn around by the end of the year. If the stimulus and bailouts were not done, the end wouldn't occur until 2011.
That's as honest as I can be.
Honestly, I'm a capitalist. But once Bush bailed out the rich greedy bankers...You have to bailout everyone else to keep the playing field even.
The banks should have never been bailed out. They should be allowed to fail. The only banks they have saved are the biggest and most corrupt. The small banks get siezed all the time by the FDIC.
Do I agree with Obama's bail outs? Yes, but only because it was preceded by Bank bailouts.
If we are going to bailout the greedy *** bankers, then we should at least bailout our Firefighters, law enforcement, education, and healthcare.
The sad reality of all of this is that....we don't need blanket bail outs (which are only a band aid). We need widespread reform.
But the Bail outs are better than doing nothing...even if they are only a temporary solution.
I believe Obama is light years better than Bush...but keep in mind, the game is still rigged. The average working person still gets screwed. Of course the average person isn't so bright...but that doesn't mean they should be taken advantage of. They should be treated fairly.
Honestly, I actually pay attention.
Bush put us into this horrific mess by wanting to fight his wars, but not raising the funds necessary to pay for them. That forced him to have to borrow the funds necessary to pay for these wars from other countries, at extremely high (and exponentially growing) interest rates.
When Bush got to office, he inherited a $4 trillion National Debt from Bill Clinton. When Bush left office, he left us with a nearly $11 trillion National Debt. That means that Bush managed to spend $3 trillion MORE THAN DOUBLE what ALL 42 of his predecessors needed 224 years to amass.
Bush put us into this mess. Then he trapped us in Iraq for a few months yet; and in doing so also managed to trap us in Afghanistan. We are stuck with his mess, and these expenses continue to be Bush's, not Obama's. Obama cannot save the money necessary to save this economy, because Bush trapped us into continuing to pay for the wars.
So if Obama cannot save money, he is doing the next best thing. He is investing it into our economy, to streamline it so that it can produce more while taking in less. That way, if he cannot save the money, we can instead produce what is necessary to cover what Bush did.
Personally, I would prefer we leave the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars immediately; not 19 months from now. Then we should raise taxes, and move all money saved/raised toward paying down what Bush did so that we can save the dollar. But that is not really practical, and somewhat dangerous since Bush left so many terrorists in Afghanistan so that he could go get revenge for Daddy while satisfying his lust for oil.
So Obama is doing the only real option left. I don't think it's great, but it's all Bush left us with. Perhaps if you guys had remembered Conservatism when it mattered, we would not be stuck in this situation as it is.
Add-on:
And for the record, we have already seen this plan work. Despite what Ronald Reagan said, he was quite the fan of big government. He comes in number 3 on the biggest spenders list, right behind Richard Nixon at number 2 and George W. Bush at number 1.
The difference between Reagan and Bush was that Reagan raised taxes on everyone for the last 7 of his 8 years in office. So he actually covered his spending, whereas Bush did not. That saved the dollar, which in turn saved the economy.
We also saw it in George H.W. Bush's final year in office. His Iraq War had had a similar effect on the economy, destroying the dollar and, in turn, sent us into recession. But his willingness to raise taxes, while having cost him his second term in office, did pay for the first Iraq War and paved the way for Clinton to finish the recovery. That is when we had the good years under Clinton.
We HAVE TO raise taxes to pay for what Bush did. To do that, we have to re-establish the economy and make it produce more so that we can cover everything. It worked for Reagan, it worked for George H.W. Bush, it worked for Clinton.
Then we lower taxes under George W. Bush, and it goes all to h*ll.
So I think I'd rather go with Obama, who is following the first three, rather than following Jr.'s plan--which got us into this mess.
Its not as much the bail outs that I oppose(I think they are a bad Idea too just not the worst one). It is the government taking control of these companies. I don't buy the story that they are putting people in charge who will magically bring life back into these dead companies. If there was someone out their who could don't you think they would have already been hired by the company? The bail outs seem to me just a clever way to disguise the government taking control of private industry. One of the first steps to socialism.
In order to correct Bush's mess, spending is necessary. The republican party of NO SENSE came out yesterday with their economic stimulus plan (14 pages) which says they will triple the tax cuts for the wealthy, triple than what it is now.
Which makes more sense? HONESTLY
Oooooh!! Listen up y'all, 9-12 project has spoken and sound quite huffy too!!
To answer your question, no I do not have a problem with the stimulus. However, as I have always stated, I am not, and was never supportive of the bailout. Hope that calms your nerves a little. *smilin*
i think its fine. because hes also helping us little poor people that never saw help when bush was in office. My family has seen alot of fruits of Obamas labor already....he upped our foodstamps.....and my bfs unemployment was extended and he also recieves an extra 50 dollar check with it now. Hes finally found work again and were getting back on our feet and if Bush or Mccain had been elected we'd still be suffering out here.
He should instead choose to invade another country (preferably a country without WMDs, and which can't defend itself) and spend all the money we don't have there, and double our deficit to boot!
In other words, he should follow in GWB's footsteps.
Want a viable alternative? Every American tax free for 1 year.
OR
Do nothing let the banks and insurance compainies fail and let someone else buy them and give them a workable plan releasing them from bad contracts.
I trust the Democratic party.
Clinton administration pulled us out of the hole the 1st Bush dug.
I beileve the Obama folks can pull us outa this situation created by the Bush repubs again
If I remember how to balance my personal checkbook properly(haven't had enough cash to worry about it recently) it never makes sense to spend money you don't have.
It's OK ! Because i have faith and trust in president Obama he have been brilliant up to this point.
Listen up Con. I have no problem with him fixing this mess at all, so yep it's okay with me.
They're good with it. It was only a problem to them when Bush did it.
See what I mean?
I love it....Obama NEEDS the money for his people.
Can't wait to read these replies.
No, just like Bush.
you can see these m----- s have no brains, they are complete dung wipes
No
Not at all. It does not effect me, whatsoever.
It does not effect the majority of Americans.
Try again.
Did the doctor
I requested my medical records from my old doctor and signed the appropriate documents to do so. However when i went to pick them up the secretary told me that i had an outstanding balance and that until it was paid i was not able to get my records. In the past i let this receptionist know that i could pay them by credit card and she told me they do not accept credit cards, only cash or check. Because of the balance i was not able to pay it by cash and figured they could send it to a creditor if need be and i simply would pay the creditor by credit card. Well here i am and she is telling me to pay half the balance or no records. I was forced to pay half the balance at that time in order to get my records which i need badly and she knew this. I was forced to use a check. I thought i had the right to obtain my medical records at any time no matter.
Hay, wake up.
The balance being turned over to a creditor would mean the Dr office would get like ten dollars out of a two hundred dollar bill owed to them.
The Dr did a service for you.
You owe for that service.
Why do people no understand this when using a Dr or hospital, they need money to operate just like anyone else.
You were FORCED to pay a debt that you should have paid before with a check. Good Lord, what is wrong with people not thinking they have to pay for things, and then want the medical record from it.
I would not have given it to you until you paid for all of it.
Hay, wake up.
The balance being turned over to a creditor would mean the Dr office would get like ten dollars out of a two hundred dollar bill owed to them.
The Dr did a service for you.
You owe for that service.
Why do people no understand this when using a Dr or hospital, they need money to operate just like anyone else.
You were FORCED to pay a debt that you should have paid before with a check. Good Lord, what is wrong with people not thinking they have to pay for things, and then want the medical record from it.
I would not have given it to you until you paid for all of it.
Do you think Michelle Obama represents you well as First
Not me... My knuckles don't drag on the ground when I walk...
No.
She's arrogant, mean spirited and downright cruel.
Her behavior and speech strongly suggest that she really hates this Country and is only here because her husband is the President.
I have NOTHING in common with her, except for the fact that we're both attorneys.
She spent her career working at no-show, patronage jobs.
I spent mine in Public Service.
But I'm White, so I don't count.
She is not supposed to represent me. She wasn't elected to anything.
She's fine as First Lady. Sorry that she's not prim enough for you.
i'm a male...but I think she's awesome. She represents strong women and intelligent people in general. She's freakishly smart...maybe even the smartest first lady around!
NO, NO and triple NO! When I think back to that *insulting* gift given to PM Brown and His wife, I am so embarrassed. Laure Bush was every inch a feminine, ladylike and charming First Lady!
Yes, she is the hottes....Okay, fine...maybe not the "hottest" per say. But definately strong, smart, and authoritative
I only see her smiling in magazines and just standing there like an idiot so no.
I think she is off to a good start at being a very fine First Lady.
Yes, very well. Smart, brave, stylish, and beautiful.
No. I'm a Homo-Sapien.
no, I've never been ridiculed for "talking white", and I always made my own pie!
Absolutely!
Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?
No, no body voted her to be First Lady
No.
No. I am not a wookie.
Tee hee...ha ha..tee hee..ha ha.....oh....sorry....I needed that...
thats no lady....
well she has a great body,
so i'd like that :)
yes, very well...it's nice to have one who isn't some kind of robot
No.
She's arrogant, mean spirited and downright cruel.
Her behavior and speech strongly suggest that she really hates this Country and is only here because her husband is the President.
I have NOTHING in common with her, except for the fact that we're both attorneys.
She spent her career working at no-show, patronage jobs.
I spent mine in Public Service.
But I'm White, so I don't count.
She is not supposed to represent me. She wasn't elected to anything.
She's fine as First Lady. Sorry that she's not prim enough for you.
i'm a male...but I think she's awesome. She represents strong women and intelligent people in general. She's freakishly smart...maybe even the smartest first lady around!
NO, NO and triple NO! When I think back to that *insulting* gift given to PM Brown and His wife, I am so embarrassed. Laure Bush was every inch a feminine, ladylike and charming First Lady!
Yes, she is the hottes....Okay, fine...maybe not the "hottest" per say. But definately strong, smart, and authoritative
I only see her smiling in magazines and just standing there like an idiot so no.
I think she is off to a good start at being a very fine First Lady.
Yes, very well. Smart, brave, stylish, and beautiful.
No. I'm a Homo-Sapien.
no, I've never been ridiculed for "talking white", and I always made my own pie!
Absolutely!
Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis?
No, no body voted her to be First Lady
No.
No. I am not a wookie.
Tee hee...ha ha..tee hee..ha ha.....oh....sorry....I needed that...
thats no lady....
well she has a great body,
so i'd like that :)
yes, very well...it's nice to have one who isn't some kind of robot
Unfairly had tax refund intercepted to pay collection. Who do I write to?
I will reward a good answer.
In 2006 my mom drove accidentally on a toll road that you can only drive on if you have a certain device and have to pay a monthly fee.
We later moved and changed all of our address information. Especially with the DMV.
Now in 2009 we found out that our tax refund was taken from us.
Apparently my mom received a citation for using the toll road, but they delivered it to the OLD address. Since we dont live there anymore, we didn't know anything about it and they kept adding more fees to it.
When my dad called the orange county transportation authority that issues the citation, they said that they send notices through the dmv. Which is impossible because we changed our address right after we moved. In fact we have registration information with our new address from 2006 that proves it.
When we tell this to them they say that there is nothing they can do because it goes to collections. We even called a lawyer and he says that it is not worth it and it is too hard to fight. Are you kidding me?
Anyways, can anyone suggest someone who i could write to. This whole thing is ridiculous and is putting my dad through a lot of pain in dealing with it. Thank you.
Get a free consultation from a lawyer. It is completely illegal to garnish any government payment. If you were hurt in any way make sure u record any payments you could not pay because of the garnishment and sue.
The person that gave me a negative mark doesn't know tax law. The only reason they can garnish any irs refund, state or federal, is child support or federal debt like student loans. This is a local entity and does not have the right to garnish without a court order which you should have been served to appear. They can NOT take it without notice.
It is even more illegal if it was a collection agency that garnished it.
Sorry, but there is nothing you can do.
In 2006 my mom drove accidentally on a toll road that you can only drive on if you have a certain device and have to pay a monthly fee.
We later moved and changed all of our address information. Especially with the DMV.
Now in 2009 we found out that our tax refund was taken from us.
Apparently my mom received a citation for using the toll road, but they delivered it to the OLD address. Since we dont live there anymore, we didn't know anything about it and they kept adding more fees to it.
When my dad called the orange county transportation authority that issues the citation, they said that they send notices through the dmv. Which is impossible because we changed our address right after we moved. In fact we have registration information with our new address from 2006 that proves it.
When we tell this to them they say that there is nothing they can do because it goes to collections. We even called a lawyer and he says that it is not worth it and it is too hard to fight. Are you kidding me?
Anyways, can anyone suggest someone who i could write to. This whole thing is ridiculous and is putting my dad through a lot of pain in dealing with it. Thank you.
Get a free consultation from a lawyer. It is completely illegal to garnish any government payment. If you were hurt in any way make sure u record any payments you could not pay because of the garnishment and sue.
The person that gave me a negative mark doesn't know tax law. The only reason they can garnish any irs refund, state or federal, is child support or federal debt like student loans. This is a local entity and does not have the right to garnish without a court order which you should have been served to appear. They can NOT take it without notice.
It is even more illegal if it was a collection agency that garnished it.
Sorry, but there is nothing you can do.
Is this a reason for the military to weep when it comes to the world trade center?
NEW YORK (AFP) ?The owners of the skyscraper being built at Ground Zero ran into controversy on Friday with the decision to strip the building of its patriotic unofficial name "Freedom Tower."
"No more freedom," read the front page of the Daily News, declaring in an editorial that the site's owner, the New York and New Jersey Port Authority, was "erasing history." The Building will be called "World Trade center."
They shouldn't call it 'Freedom Tower' because America becomes less and less free everyday.
I agree with their decision.
There is no reason to politicize the name of the building.
I think the World Trade Center honors the event better anyway, as that name is burned into our brains indelibly anyway, and also basically tells those who would destroy us that we remember, have rebuilt, and will move on.
Also, before anyone accuses me of anything, I am a Marine just back from yet another deployment, so go ahead and stop right there with any accusations.
Well I can understand why people would prefer it be called "Freedom Tower", but honestly, that's somewhat of a stupid name. "World Trade Center" actually explains something about what goes on in the building.
Plus, if we give it the same name it had before, it's like we're saying "you can knock our towers down, but we'll just build them back up."
They're not erasing history by calling it the World Trade Center. Years from now, kids will hear what happened to the "World Trade Center" and they will have no clue that it is actually the "Freedom Tower."
But if you tell them that terrorists knocked down the World Trade Center, and that building still exists, it sends the message that you can't destroy us, you can't knock us down...we'll just build it right back up again.
YES! there is a good reason why! see all of out family and loved ones died in that mess. My aunt and my uncle were both killed on it and my dad was one of the firefighters who died trying to help! so dont you ask that question. There is a really good reason to weep!
I completely agree with Alex's wifey - However, unless I am reading the question wrong, the asker is saying isn't it sad for the military that they have decided NOT to name it the Freedom Tower - Not bashing on the military!
um...yeah! this could possibly have been prevented. it was a terrible disaster. america doesn't like to feel weak. the military is like the guards. they feel like they let their country down. i cry every time i see the videos.
What does the military have to do with the name of the new trade center towers? And no, its not a reason to weep.
your disrespect for the military is pathetic
The day you die the world will be a better place
maybe because of all those people that died
that is sad :(:(:(
It is man, it is :(
well they just changed the name on us
I'm so damn tired of your stupid questions and disrespect for our military members.You're the dumbass who asked if it was appropriate to tell the family of a fallen military member not to be sad cause they knew they could die. No one wants to hear it, really. Why don't you do something more constructive and productive with your days?
"No more freedom," read the front page of the Daily News, declaring in an editorial that the site's owner, the New York and New Jersey Port Authority, was "erasing history." The Building will be called "World Trade center."
They shouldn't call it 'Freedom Tower' because America becomes less and less free everyday.
I agree with their decision.
There is no reason to politicize the name of the building.
I think the World Trade Center honors the event better anyway, as that name is burned into our brains indelibly anyway, and also basically tells those who would destroy us that we remember, have rebuilt, and will move on.
Also, before anyone accuses me of anything, I am a Marine just back from yet another deployment, so go ahead and stop right there with any accusations.
Well I can understand why people would prefer it be called "Freedom Tower", but honestly, that's somewhat of a stupid name. "World Trade Center" actually explains something about what goes on in the building.
Plus, if we give it the same name it had before, it's like we're saying "you can knock our towers down, but we'll just build them back up."
They're not erasing history by calling it the World Trade Center. Years from now, kids will hear what happened to the "World Trade Center" and they will have no clue that it is actually the "Freedom Tower."
But if you tell them that terrorists knocked down the World Trade Center, and that building still exists, it sends the message that you can't destroy us, you can't knock us down...we'll just build it right back up again.
YES! there is a good reason why! see all of out family and loved ones died in that mess. My aunt and my uncle were both killed on it and my dad was one of the firefighters who died trying to help! so dont you ask that question. There is a really good reason to weep!
I completely agree with Alex's wifey - However, unless I am reading the question wrong, the asker is saying isn't it sad for the military that they have decided NOT to name it the Freedom Tower - Not bashing on the military!
um...yeah! this could possibly have been prevented. it was a terrible disaster. america doesn't like to feel weak. the military is like the guards. they feel like they let their country down. i cry every time i see the videos.
What does the military have to do with the name of the new trade center towers? And no, its not a reason to weep.
your disrespect for the military is pathetic
The day you die the world will be a better place
maybe because of all those people that died
that is sad :(:(:(
It is man, it is :(
well they just changed the name on us
I'm so damn tired of your stupid questions and disrespect for our military members.You're the dumbass who asked if it was appropriate to tell the family of a fallen military member not to be sad cause they knew they could die. No one wants to hear it, really. Why don't you do something more constructive and productive with your days?
How do you feel about the whole japanese and north korean issue?
what do you think will happen if the north korean missile or w/e gets shot down? total war?
Oh Good God, this is hardly the first time that North Korea has rattled it's sabers. Not a big deal.
the Japs are more worried about debris from the launch than having to shoot it down. Don't get me wrong Kim Jong is crazy but to start WWIII over a satelite launch probably not a good idea!
That's what the Japaneese should have done about the bombs that destroyed their cities. However, humanity is having a tough time learning.
Oh Good God, this is hardly the first time that North Korea has rattled it's sabers. Not a big deal.
the Japs are more worried about debris from the launch than having to shoot it down. Don't get me wrong Kim Jong is crazy but to start WWIII over a satelite launch probably not a good idea!
That's what the Japaneese should have done about the bombs that destroyed their cities. However, humanity is having a tough time learning.
Do you think Barack Hussein Obama is uppity and arrogant?
uppity and arrogant AND Pompous
Yes, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the color of his skin and everything to do with the content of his character. He is the walking embodiment of a liberal politician; he uses buzz words like "hope" and "change" to lure the gullible, desperate masses into his trap so that he can gain influence in the exact same way as Hitler did.
I honestly think that he now believes he is a Super Star Celebrity. If he had a chance to be a famous actor or the President he would prefer to be the actor. I wish he could put as much effort in to keeping our country save and solvent.
Yes. I think the only person that Obama doesn't talk to as if they were a 3rd grader is his wife. If he talked in a condescending manner to Michelle she would give him a vicious beating.
I think he is ruining what is left of our economy by spending money we don't have faster than any president before him, and is infringing on our Constitutional protections.
I couldn't care less about whatever social graces he may lack.
Yes, extremely. His entire administration is, they need to know their place. I'd love to welcome them to America and thank them for all they've done for us. They would understand power means nothing here.
Why? He's probably no different than any other President we've had in that regard.
Has any white person ever been described as "uppity"?
Hmm...he does have traits of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Dude, you are funny as sh*t. It's like you came to 2009 in a time machine from 1930.
yes... Clarence Thomas mentioned those words during his hearing
Yes where have you been-what does uppity mean?
Wow. Use any racist stereotypes lately?
His own books tell the tale, and his track record backs it up!
No I think he is charismatic. Fake ,Phony and a LIAR!
You're a racist.
YES
yes
Ah - poor little right wing pinhead got himself an uppity President, does he? Well, for the racist right, Barack sure is that wrong color to be in your country club - that's for sure!
And if Barack doesn't walk around with his head down like a good little n*****, then he must be pretty arrogant, hu? And racist right wingers REALLY take offense at that. Pretty quick they'll be marrying our white women!!!!!!!!
Yes, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the color of his skin and everything to do with the content of his character. He is the walking embodiment of a liberal politician; he uses buzz words like "hope" and "change" to lure the gullible, desperate masses into his trap so that he can gain influence in the exact same way as Hitler did.
I honestly think that he now believes he is a Super Star Celebrity. If he had a chance to be a famous actor or the President he would prefer to be the actor. I wish he could put as much effort in to keeping our country save and solvent.
Yes. I think the only person that Obama doesn't talk to as if they were a 3rd grader is his wife. If he talked in a condescending manner to Michelle she would give him a vicious beating.
I think he is ruining what is left of our economy by spending money we don't have faster than any president before him, and is infringing on our Constitutional protections.
I couldn't care less about whatever social graces he may lack.
Yes, extremely. His entire administration is, they need to know their place. I'd love to welcome them to America and thank them for all they've done for us. They would understand power means nothing here.
Why? He's probably no different than any other President we've had in that regard.
Has any white person ever been described as "uppity"?
Hmm...he does have traits of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Dude, you are funny as sh*t. It's like you came to 2009 in a time machine from 1930.
yes... Clarence Thomas mentioned those words during his hearing
Yes where have you been-what does uppity mean?
Wow. Use any racist stereotypes lately?
His own books tell the tale, and his track record backs it up!
No I think he is charismatic. Fake ,Phony and a LIAR!
You're a racist.
YES
yes
Ah - poor little right wing pinhead got himself an uppity President, does he? Well, for the racist right, Barack sure is that wrong color to be in your country club - that's for sure!
And if Barack doesn't walk around with his head down like a good little n*****, then he must be pretty arrogant, hu? And racist right wingers REALLY take offense at that. Pretty quick they'll be marrying our white women!!!!!!!!
Do you think Obama
He wants to make a civil security force that is as well trained and funded as our military to protect the rich under the guise of National Security.Our military is designed for that purpose.
Nazi brown shirts served Hitler similarly they were his personal spies and thugs taking weapons from the civilians and reporting people speaking out about anti Hitler information.And then he got his dictatorship. He killed all the senior brown shirts and the brown shirts were gone..Can you think of any other reason Obama would train citizens,when he could use the same money to increase technology and strengthen our Military.Does that make common sense to anyone besides me?? How about beefing up our security called law enforcement?FBI,CIA,etc.
H.R. 1388 " Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act "...
It's nothing more than an introduction for what Obama last year called his "National Civilian Security Force" which will be as big and well-funded as the U.S. military.
Conjures up images of Hitler's youth groups to me.
If it's not, it certainly is a good start in the (Obama Brown shirts.) Next they will be indoctrinated into liberal thought and they will get jobs before those kids who are normal and didn't get the propaganda. They are specifically targeting those kids who are impressionable and vulnerable to imposed doctrine. Foster care, disadvantaged youth, impoverished youth. many will be fatherless. This is like the formation of a giant gang-bang
No. If you read the bill you might understand what it is about. That is if you can comprehend the legalese.
The Hitler comparisons are ridiculous. Keep them up if you would like to continue to lose all credibility. Intelligent people do not buy into these childish comparisons.
Yes absolutely, Brownshirts. He was told that he would face terrorist attacks, a coup and opposition from within his won country, so he is preparing, like Hitler did.
Yawn.
Let me know when your return to reality, and then we'll talk. And lawgirl's right, the Hitler red herring is a modern retelling of the reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
I think it's wildly unfair to compare college kids who want to volunteer in their communities to Nazis...
You Republicans will stop at nothing to be racist and hateful...
Have you no shame?
They are meant for some level of civil control.
I your mind it can only be something negative because no republican came up with it.
They can try.
In his dreams.
What are you babbling about?
It is exactly as GiGreg13, said. No one wants to read or understand what is taking place. TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.
Nazi brown shirts served Hitler similarly they were his personal spies and thugs taking weapons from the civilians and reporting people speaking out about anti Hitler information.And then he got his dictatorship. He killed all the senior brown shirts and the brown shirts were gone..Can you think of any other reason Obama would train citizens,when he could use the same money to increase technology and strengthen our Military.Does that make common sense to anyone besides me?? How about beefing up our security called law enforcement?FBI,CIA,etc.
H.R. 1388 " Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act "...
It's nothing more than an introduction for what Obama last year called his "National Civilian Security Force" which will be as big and well-funded as the U.S. military.
Conjures up images of Hitler's youth groups to me.
If it's not, it certainly is a good start in the (Obama Brown shirts.) Next they will be indoctrinated into liberal thought and they will get jobs before those kids who are normal and didn't get the propaganda. They are specifically targeting those kids who are impressionable and vulnerable to imposed doctrine. Foster care, disadvantaged youth, impoverished youth. many will be fatherless. This is like the formation of a giant gang-bang
No. If you read the bill you might understand what it is about. That is if you can comprehend the legalese.
The Hitler comparisons are ridiculous. Keep them up if you would like to continue to lose all credibility. Intelligent people do not buy into these childish comparisons.
Yes absolutely, Brownshirts. He was told that he would face terrorist attacks, a coup and opposition from within his won country, so he is preparing, like Hitler did.
Yawn.
Let me know when your return to reality, and then we'll talk. And lawgirl's right, the Hitler red herring is a modern retelling of the reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
I think it's wildly unfair to compare college kids who want to volunteer in their communities to Nazis...
You Republicans will stop at nothing to be racist and hateful...
Have you no shame?
They are meant for some level of civil control.
I your mind it can only be something negative because no republican came up with it.
They can try.
In his dreams.
What are you babbling about?
It is exactly as GiGreg13, said. No one wants to read or understand what is taking place. TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK.
Do think that religion interferes with politics too much?
I find this an important issue because I see the two cross paths all the time. It is inevitable...
That would be a resounding YES.
I think that these mega-churches are just getting way to big to be "good".
They routinely stomp out the little home-grown churches full of good people and replace them with shopping malls disguised as "spirituality centers"... They get their people into important positions on the city council and the local media and so they tightly control any opposition to their growth.
This is not to say that religious people should be kept out of office... quite the contrary. But we should closely examine the way these huge corporate mega-churches are exerting their control over otherwise good communities.
Yes! That was one of George Bush's reasons for banning embryonic stem cell research, and one of the reasons cited for banning gay marriage and gay adoption (along with other gay rights) in some states. Whether you like it or not, "Separation of Church and State" means that religion should play no part in the legislation of law.
Yes, gay marriage ban, Bush's ban on stem cell research, the fight against choice. All of those things are governmental issues, not religious- governmental issues. Leave the religious beliefs out of our laws.
#############
ADD ON
Well, I wouldn't go that far as to take out under God from the pledge or off of our money. I am comfortable with all of that. Even having the ten commandments in government buildings.
I am saying that we shouldn't legislate religion. .
Harry Reed, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank are good examples of the lack of Christianity in politics. Without morality in politics, they quickly become corrupted and greedy, because without fear of God, there is no reason to be moral.
Really - I see no evidence of any principles or morality in politics. Could you provide an example.
I believe that Religion interferes with spirituality.
No, I think the opposite is true.
I will if you people dont suck it up and vote for Romney
that's why there's supposed to be a separation between church and state..
No I don't.
That would be a resounding YES.
I think that these mega-churches are just getting way to big to be "good".
They routinely stomp out the little home-grown churches full of good people and replace them with shopping malls disguised as "spirituality centers"... They get their people into important positions on the city council and the local media and so they tightly control any opposition to their growth.
This is not to say that religious people should be kept out of office... quite the contrary. But we should closely examine the way these huge corporate mega-churches are exerting their control over otherwise good communities.
Yes! That was one of George Bush's reasons for banning embryonic stem cell research, and one of the reasons cited for banning gay marriage and gay adoption (along with other gay rights) in some states. Whether you like it or not, "Separation of Church and State" means that religion should play no part in the legislation of law.
Yes, gay marriage ban, Bush's ban on stem cell research, the fight against choice. All of those things are governmental issues, not religious- governmental issues. Leave the religious beliefs out of our laws.
#############
ADD ON
Well, I wouldn't go that far as to take out under God from the pledge or off of our money. I am comfortable with all of that. Even having the ten commandments in government buildings.
I am saying that we shouldn't legislate religion. .
Harry Reed, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank are good examples of the lack of Christianity in politics. Without morality in politics, they quickly become corrupted and greedy, because without fear of God, there is no reason to be moral.
Really - I see no evidence of any principles or morality in politics. Could you provide an example.
I believe that Religion interferes with spirituality.
No, I think the opposite is true.
I will if you people dont suck it up and vote for Romney
that's why there's supposed to be a separation between church and state..
No I don't.
What does everyone think of a game that shows the horrors of our soldiers in arms in 100% reality?
It would be pretty impossible to replicate the reality of combat. First, unless we invent "smello-vision," the enticing aromas of a gut wound or a soldier who burned to death a week ago are completely lost. So too is the sheer volume of sound on a modern battlefield. The proper sound volume would blow the speakers out of most any TV.
Secondly, there's the emotional aspect. The players would have to be completely isolated with only the other squad members for a long period of time, and would have to come to rely upon them. That way, when you make a mistake as the player and one of your squadmates dies for it, there would be some genuine sense of loss.
Third, the down side of getting shot in a game is that you have to start the level over. The reality of getting shot in the real thing is immense pain, long recovery times, possible lifetime disability or even death. How are you going to replicate THAT experience?
Then too, there's the lack of sleep, the sameness of the chow and the grinding discomfort from heat, cold, sand, leaches, and whatever else. Those are also difficult to replicate in a game, aren't they?
In short, combat isn't, and never will be a game.
Those real life experiences cause soldiers to have PTSD.
Why would you want people who aren't soldiers to suffer from that, as if they don't have enough bad life experiences?
Secondly, people get de-sensitized by games, movies, tv these days..
We aren't ready for those images..
Sure... let's put it on right after....
"ACLU presents..... Jane's Abortion!"
Or... "It's OK, they're going to do it anyway" Production of.... Teenage STD sores on your vagina, and Baby Momma's illigit kids"
Hey... seriously, I'm all for it. Let's be "fair and balanced" and show the horrors that BOTH sides say they have issues with. That's REAL "reality TV".
I don't know that game; but I'd say it is not suited to civilian use.
I think it's a form of recruitment.
As long as you're in it and we can shoot you I'll buy it.
Secondly, there's the emotional aspect. The players would have to be completely isolated with only the other squad members for a long period of time, and would have to come to rely upon them. That way, when you make a mistake as the player and one of your squadmates dies for it, there would be some genuine sense of loss.
Third, the down side of getting shot in a game is that you have to start the level over. The reality of getting shot in the real thing is immense pain, long recovery times, possible lifetime disability or even death. How are you going to replicate THAT experience?
Then too, there's the lack of sleep, the sameness of the chow and the grinding discomfort from heat, cold, sand, leaches, and whatever else. Those are also difficult to replicate in a game, aren't they?
In short, combat isn't, and never will be a game.
Those real life experiences cause soldiers to have PTSD.
Why would you want people who aren't soldiers to suffer from that, as if they don't have enough bad life experiences?
Secondly, people get de-sensitized by games, movies, tv these days..
We aren't ready for those images..
Sure... let's put it on right after....
"ACLU presents..... Jane's Abortion!"
Or... "It's OK, they're going to do it anyway" Production of.... Teenage STD sores on your vagina, and Baby Momma's illigit kids"
Hey... seriously, I'm all for it. Let's be "fair and balanced" and show the horrors that BOTH sides say they have issues with. That's REAL "reality TV".
I don't know that game; but I'd say it is not suited to civilian use.
I think it's a form of recruitment.
As long as you're in it and we can shoot you I'll buy it.
Is there a way to get out of repaying my unemployment benefits?
I lied on my unemployment application and received over $1000. I received a letter stating I have to pay it back because my employer explained I walked out, but I told them he fired me...wouldn't the employer have to prove this....why would they take the employers word against mine....anyone?
You can appeal this through the unemployment office it's a 50/50 what you got lose a $1000.00 bucks. You don't need a lawyer and it wont cost anything but you really need to have your peas & Q together if you want a chance at having this over turned. You may win my girlfriend did in the same situation.
Good Luck
No. This is the one way they side with the employer, always.
Try and call and set up a payment schedule asap. Unemployment is not patient. They typically wait just over 30 days before they take the money out of your bank account, garnish your wages and put a lien on everything from your car to your house. They are even more aggressive than the State.
You can, right now, get to your local labor board and file wrongful termination claim. If you win, you will be eligible to have this turned around and the employer will be fined.
I have read all the responses to your question. In MY opinion it is that all states are different. I think you should take it to trial too. Call and ask. They pay into that fund and their rates( in some states) go up if someone files a claim. Maybe you weren't honest ok, but there are alot of scum bag employers out there who try to avoid paying people.*
They took your employers word against yours because your employer has little to lose by telling the truth.
You've admitted you lied, you owe the money. Pay it back.
You owe the money. Don't try to fight it or they'll ruin your credit and potentially go after you for fraud.
Your employer would have exit paperwork that shows you left. That's why. You have to pay it back. Don't lie.
call them & say you disagree with what happened. You are entitled to a hearing.
Don't lie and you wouldn't have a problem.
Karma's a b*tch, aint it?
You can appeal this through the unemployment office it's a 50/50 what you got lose a $1000.00 bucks. You don't need a lawyer and it wont cost anything but you really need to have your peas & Q together if you want a chance at having this over turned. You may win my girlfriend did in the same situation.
Good Luck
No. This is the one way they side with the employer, always.
Try and call and set up a payment schedule asap. Unemployment is not patient. They typically wait just over 30 days before they take the money out of your bank account, garnish your wages and put a lien on everything from your car to your house. They are even more aggressive than the State.
You can, right now, get to your local labor board and file wrongful termination claim. If you win, you will be eligible to have this turned around and the employer will be fined.
I have read all the responses to your question. In MY opinion it is that all states are different. I think you should take it to trial too. Call and ask. They pay into that fund and their rates( in some states) go up if someone files a claim. Maybe you weren't honest ok, but there are alot of scum bag employers out there who try to avoid paying people.*
They took your employers word against yours because your employer has little to lose by telling the truth.
You've admitted you lied, you owe the money. Pay it back.
You owe the money. Don't try to fight it or they'll ruin your credit and potentially go after you for fraud.
Your employer would have exit paperwork that shows you left. That's why. You have to pay it back. Don't lie.
call them & say you disagree with what happened. You are entitled to a hearing.
Don't lie and you wouldn't have a problem.
Karma's a b*tch, aint it?
Isn
All Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims
What exactly is a "moderate Taliban"?
One who only cuts off half of your head? or one that only uses road side bombs on odd days of the week? or perhaps its one that only uses suicide bombers only on the days that it doesn't rain?
Is Obama that much out of touch with reality? Neville Chamberlain "talked" to Hitler didn't do much of anything did it.
If that don't work, he'll just send them $900 Million like he did to Hamas.
"All Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims"
One can not make a broad statement like that against an entire people. If that were true, then it would be acceptable to say that in our own country the same flip approach to labeling could be used about Americans. The Oklahoma City bombings, the Kent State massacre as it was referred to, Waco, the Uni-bomber, that scientist who was responsible for all the Anthrax mailings....all the way back in history there are findings that could be labeled in such a way. On the more simple levels, why not add abusive parents, spouses, and sex offenders to the same labeled group. Throughout history, all engage in a form of terror and this is true of any country.
It's truly unfair to make such a broad statement regarding one group of people or culture, even when using the flip approach.
That being said, reaching out to some in conversation is plausible. There are always those that are in any insurgent groups, cults, whatever one wants to call them, that can be reached. Another truism of history and the human condition.
Apparently they were moderate enough for us to form alliances with them in the 80's. Oh how quickly the young forget.
"All Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims"
Oh really? I didn't know Timothy Mcveigh was a Muslim! Thanks for clearing that up with your flawless logic!
Yes it is the same. I have not figured out why he is doing this. What I do know is that evil is not a good thing. We need to wait for them to come crawling to us.
Hopefully he'll spend the rest of this term trying to find this moderate taliban, and other such snipes and stop doing stuff. It'll be better for us all.
Obama is one of them so he wont have a problem talking to them
Yawn boring
don't bore me with your nonsense
What exactly is a "moderate Taliban"?
One who only cuts off half of your head? or one that only uses road side bombs on odd days of the week? or perhaps its one that only uses suicide bombers only on the days that it doesn't rain?
Is Obama that much out of touch with reality? Neville Chamberlain "talked" to Hitler didn't do much of anything did it.
If that don't work, he'll just send them $900 Million like he did to Hamas.
"All Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims"
One can not make a broad statement like that against an entire people. If that were true, then it would be acceptable to say that in our own country the same flip approach to labeling could be used about Americans. The Oklahoma City bombings, the Kent State massacre as it was referred to, Waco, the Uni-bomber, that scientist who was responsible for all the Anthrax mailings....all the way back in history there are findings that could be labeled in such a way. On the more simple levels, why not add abusive parents, spouses, and sex offenders to the same labeled group. Throughout history, all engage in a form of terror and this is true of any country.
It's truly unfair to make such a broad statement regarding one group of people or culture, even when using the flip approach.
That being said, reaching out to some in conversation is plausible. There are always those that are in any insurgent groups, cults, whatever one wants to call them, that can be reached. Another truism of history and the human condition.
Apparently they were moderate enough for us to form alliances with them in the 80's. Oh how quickly the young forget.
"All Muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims"
Oh really? I didn't know Timothy Mcveigh was a Muslim! Thanks for clearing that up with your flawless logic!
Yes it is the same. I have not figured out why he is doing this. What I do know is that evil is not a good thing. We need to wait for them to come crawling to us.
Hopefully he'll spend the rest of this term trying to find this moderate taliban, and other such snipes and stop doing stuff. It'll be better for us all.
Obama is one of them so he wont have a problem talking to them
Yawn boring
don't bore me with your nonsense
Do you think that the United States would be much better off with a universal health care system?
Please answer the question if you know a good deal about the issue. NO crap please :)
Of course, how can anybody argue with having health care?
The rich don't want the poor to have it as it might cost them a few pennies
All civilized countries have it already
Canadians would never give it up (they may complaint about it, but that's what people do) Same with UK
Most complaints come from not enough funding, people would rather spend on executive bonuses (because they work hard???)
No. First of all...our taxes will pay for universal health care! Nothing is for nothing! Also, the government will be able to dictate who gets a MRI; who gets an operation; who gets a special test; who gets dialysis; etc. Just investigate England's health care program...A member of Parliament just made a statement to the U.S., and that was "Don't do it." Their health care system is absolutely terrible...so what gets me is that they make you think the government is going to pay for your health care! ;Not the case. All working citizens will pay the government through deductions from their pay..Remember nothing is for nothing...We are going to get shafted by the Pelosis; the Reids and the Dodds of this country...they are on the Obama payroll and they are puppets of the administration's rush to Socialism.
of course.
1st it will benefit the 44 million that dont have insurance now
and 2nd. Healthcare needs to be a not for profit venture. RIght now, its "for profit" meaning, all the advertising of insurance companies, high salaries for CEOs and duty to turn a profit are all passed on to the consumer. which makes it very very expensive
3rd, the LESS coverage an insurance company provides you the more money they make...The goals of healthcare right now are NOT HEALTHCARE
Have you heard about VA hospitals? Have you ever heard the jokes about military hospitals? This stuff didn't just invent itself. The government can screw up anything. I grew up getting health care at army hospitals. Trust me, you do not want the government running your health care.
No much worse, you would have local boards making risk reward assessments on your life. and you would have to wait months for treatment..
In the end you will probably buy additional insurance to avoid the government program, while subsidizing others who chose government
The United States already has the most advanced health care system in the world.
Why would you want to go to the DMV to have your cancer cured?
No, the quality of health care goes down, down, down.
Why don't you ask people from the UK or Canada. Big, big mistake,but I guess that's where these libs are taking us so whats the use of asking?
No.
Yes.
I would prefer it to what we've got right now. We can't afford private healthcare for our family right now, so we just go without, and that scares me.
no
Of course, how can anybody argue with having health care?
The rich don't want the poor to have it as it might cost them a few pennies
All civilized countries have it already
Canadians would never give it up (they may complaint about it, but that's what people do) Same with UK
Most complaints come from not enough funding, people would rather spend on executive bonuses (because they work hard???)
No. First of all...our taxes will pay for universal health care! Nothing is for nothing! Also, the government will be able to dictate who gets a MRI; who gets an operation; who gets a special test; who gets dialysis; etc. Just investigate England's health care program...A member of Parliament just made a statement to the U.S., and that was "Don't do it." Their health care system is absolutely terrible...so what gets me is that they make you think the government is going to pay for your health care! ;Not the case. All working citizens will pay the government through deductions from their pay..Remember nothing is for nothing...We are going to get shafted by the Pelosis; the Reids and the Dodds of this country...they are on the Obama payroll and they are puppets of the administration's rush to Socialism.
of course.
1st it will benefit the 44 million that dont have insurance now
and 2nd. Healthcare needs to be a not for profit venture. RIght now, its "for profit" meaning, all the advertising of insurance companies, high salaries for CEOs and duty to turn a profit are all passed on to the consumer. which makes it very very expensive
3rd, the LESS coverage an insurance company provides you the more money they make...The goals of healthcare right now are NOT HEALTHCARE
Have you heard about VA hospitals? Have you ever heard the jokes about military hospitals? This stuff didn't just invent itself. The government can screw up anything. I grew up getting health care at army hospitals. Trust me, you do not want the government running your health care.
No much worse, you would have local boards making risk reward assessments on your life. and you would have to wait months for treatment..
In the end you will probably buy additional insurance to avoid the government program, while subsidizing others who chose government
The United States already has the most advanced health care system in the world.
Why would you want to go to the DMV to have your cancer cured?
No, the quality of health care goes down, down, down.
Why don't you ask people from the UK or Canada. Big, big mistake,but I guess that's where these libs are taking us so whats the use of asking?
No.
Yes.
I would prefer it to what we've got right now. We can't afford private healthcare for our family right now, so we just go without, and that scares me.
no
What do you think of the cops.That stopped that football player.From seeing his dying mother in law.?
Seems to me cops are getting away with a lot of ego trips.
Cops in general are just too self-indulged and are always on a power trip. And I feel bad for the good cops out there, however few there may be, just trying to do a good job and maintain peace. But I%26#039;m personally sick of police officers that threaten to %26quot;toss you in jail%26quot; for asking questions or something along those lines for some %26quot;awful%26quot; offense like going 5 mph over the limit.
Some of these answers surprise and scare me at the same time. This guy never even told the policeman that he was a NFL Player, so what does that have to do with anything? No matter if this guy is a NFL athlete or not he should have been shown some compassion by someone who is supposed to help those in need.
Also, the problem with this story is that it moves us backwards. It gives people the opportunity to yell racism when it clearly was not. the cop had no way of knowing the race of the vehicle occupants. Now because this cop is clearly stupid and has no common sense that department will be plagued and the good officers will have to suffer.
Every time a good officer makes a legitimate stop, the occupant can make up some ridiculous excuse and that officer will have to second guess himself in fear that he will be called a racist. Everyone is not cutout to be a cop and I think this guy should really reconsider his employment choice.
i think that was horrible. the cop could have at least followed him into the hospital, let him say good-bye and console his wife. then when it was over, he could have taken care of the offence. that cop was a total jerk,
Was he breaking the law? Then I say good for them. %26quot;Thank you for doing your duty%26quot;. %26quot;Glad that someone knows that the law doesn%26#039;t apply just to regular folks%26quot;.
Probably something like that.
That%26#039;s BS. What man cares about seeing his dying mother-in-law? THis is the media%26#039;s attempt to blame whitey once again.
If he broke the law then he should have been stopped. Being a football player has nothing to do with it.
Boy, this question doesn%26#039;t get old every five minutes.
This whole situation is unfortunate.
This was total bs and that guy should not be a police officer.
Hang %26#039;em
It was a single officer not officers and secondly, th officer did nothing wrong other than make a comment about screwing a guy over but, that could mean anything. The man ran a red light putting other drivers and themselves in danger. Yes, the mother dying is a sad thing. What is even more tragic is if running that red light killed a young family of four. Yes it is possible and happens everyday in this country.
Could the cop have handled the situation better? Yes. However, they are human and make mistakes and bad decisions. Always have and always will.
Should he be fired? Based on what I read not only no but, he** no. If anything he should be commended for possibly saving lives that day.
Unfortunately, because the story made the news and the person involved is a famous football player the officer may indeed be fired or at least suspended unjustly. Most of today%26#039;s departments refuse to stand by their officers whether they did anything wrong or not. Just once, I would like to see a major department spokesperson say our officer was absolutely correct and we support them 100% in the highly publicize cases.
Why is it every time you hear of a cop making a mistake or using bad judgement the first thing people want to do is fire the officer and ruin there lives? If we fired every officer for making a bad decision we would have no police officers. In fact if we fired everyone who ever made a mistake on the job we would have a 100% unemployment rate.
No one has ever been thrown in jail because they messed up. They were thrown in jail because they broke the law. That is why they lost their jobs.
Exactly what law did this young brave officer break. That%26#039;s right none. He possibly made a bad judgement call as I am sure you have on the job. Maybe you too should be fired.
Incidentally, every time a officer puts on the badge and goes to work he is sticking up for Joe and Jane Public. Sadly many times, this leads to an officer%26#039;s death. When was the last time Joe Public lost his life sticking up for an officer?
%0D%0A
Cops in general are just too self-indulged and are always on a power trip. And I feel bad for the good cops out there, however few there may be, just trying to do a good job and maintain peace. But I%26#039;m personally sick of police officers that threaten to %26quot;toss you in jail%26quot; for asking questions or something along those lines for some %26quot;awful%26quot; offense like going 5 mph over the limit.
Some of these answers surprise and scare me at the same time. This guy never even told the policeman that he was a NFL Player, so what does that have to do with anything? No matter if this guy is a NFL athlete or not he should have been shown some compassion by someone who is supposed to help those in need.
Also, the problem with this story is that it moves us backwards. It gives people the opportunity to yell racism when it clearly was not. the cop had no way of knowing the race of the vehicle occupants. Now because this cop is clearly stupid and has no common sense that department will be plagued and the good officers will have to suffer.
Every time a good officer makes a legitimate stop, the occupant can make up some ridiculous excuse and that officer will have to second guess himself in fear that he will be called a racist. Everyone is not cutout to be a cop and I think this guy should really reconsider his employment choice.
i think that was horrible. the cop could have at least followed him into the hospital, let him say good-bye and console his wife. then when it was over, he could have taken care of the offence. that cop was a total jerk,
Was he breaking the law? Then I say good for them. %26quot;Thank you for doing your duty%26quot;. %26quot;Glad that someone knows that the law doesn%26#039;t apply just to regular folks%26quot;.
Probably something like that.
That%26#039;s BS. What man cares about seeing his dying mother-in-law? THis is the media%26#039;s attempt to blame whitey once again.
If he broke the law then he should have been stopped. Being a football player has nothing to do with it.
Boy, this question doesn%26#039;t get old every five minutes.
This whole situation is unfortunate.
This was total bs and that guy should not be a police officer.
Hang %26#039;em
It was a single officer not officers and secondly, th officer did nothing wrong other than make a comment about screwing a guy over but, that could mean anything. The man ran a red light putting other drivers and themselves in danger. Yes, the mother dying is a sad thing. What is even more tragic is if running that red light killed a young family of four. Yes it is possible and happens everyday in this country.
Could the cop have handled the situation better? Yes. However, they are human and make mistakes and bad decisions. Always have and always will.
Should he be fired? Based on what I read not only no but, he** no. If anything he should be commended for possibly saving lives that day.
Unfortunately, because the story made the news and the person involved is a famous football player the officer may indeed be fired or at least suspended unjustly. Most of today%26#039;s departments refuse to stand by their officers whether they did anything wrong or not. Just once, I would like to see a major department spokesperson say our officer was absolutely correct and we support them 100% in the highly publicize cases.
Why is it every time you hear of a cop making a mistake or using bad judgement the first thing people want to do is fire the officer and ruin there lives? If we fired every officer for making a bad decision we would have no police officers. In fact if we fired everyone who ever made a mistake on the job we would have a 100% unemployment rate.
No one has ever been thrown in jail because they messed up. They were thrown in jail because they broke the law. That is why they lost their jobs.
Exactly what law did this young brave officer break. That%26#039;s right none. He possibly made a bad judgement call as I am sure you have on the job. Maybe you too should be fired.
Incidentally, every time a officer puts on the badge and goes to work he is sticking up for Joe and Jane Public. Sadly many times, this leads to an officer%26#039;s death. When was the last time Joe Public lost his life sticking up for an officer?
%0D%0A
Corrections officer books?
well i bought th corrections officer exam book, my testing is april 4th , will the testing be the same as the book. im studying for it so i hope i pass. do you have any ideas where the training might be when people passes. let me know asap
Hello Dora. The book usually has a multitude of questions taken from the actual tests themselves. The main advantage is that you will see the type of questions that will be on the test. Any help in this area is a plus.
As far as your training, this is dependent on whether this is a county correction officer or state. If you are county, the Sheriff's Department that is hiring you will train you themselves. If you are applying for a state correctional officer position, you will attend the Corrections Training Academy for the state you are in.
I will add one more. If this is a Federal officers position, the training is done at the academy in Georgia.
Academy training is usually 5 to 8 weeks depending on which state. You stay at the academy during the week ( monday through friday) and go home for the weekends, unless you are local enough that you want to commute daily.
I hope this helps and you can find it useful
Source(s):
20 years as a Corrections Officer in a max prison. Firearms Instructor, Arsenal Officer, Armorer, Use of Force Instructor, Chemical Munitions Instructor and part time instructor at the Ohio Corrections Academy.
Hello Dora. The book usually has a multitude of questions taken from the actual tests themselves. The main advantage is that you will see the type of questions that will be on the test. Any help in this area is a plus.
As far as your training, this is dependent on whether this is a county correction officer or state. If you are county, the Sheriff's Department that is hiring you will train you themselves. If you are applying for a state correctional officer position, you will attend the Corrections Training Academy for the state you are in.
I will add one more. If this is a Federal officers position, the training is done at the academy in Georgia.
Academy training is usually 5 to 8 weeks depending on which state. You stay at the academy during the week ( monday through friday) and go home for the weekends, unless you are local enough that you want to commute daily.
I hope this helps and you can find it useful
Source(s):
20 years as a Corrections Officer in a max prison. Firearms Instructor, Arsenal Officer, Armorer, Use of Force Instructor, Chemical Munitions Instructor and part time instructor at the Ohio Corrections Academy.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Have you noticed how Obama throws his leg out when walking like a rap singer signaling that he is still?
the same southside Chicago community organizer relocated to do big reorganization from the oval office?
the first time I saw him walk after being elected I thought something was wrong with his leg.... then he was all about shooting hoops, so nah...
He be shuckin and jivin,dawg!
%26quot;AND NOOOOBODDY MESSES WIT JOE !!!%26quot;
When Obama speaks, what I hear in his voice is 80% %26quot;Reverend%26quot; Wright, and 20% Jon Lovitz (Ralphie the Liar)
How come the republicans went along with crazy bush and his antics and spending a trillion dollars in Iraq then realize their moment of descent and moment of bravery when the Democrats came into power ja?
This is either weird or something else., are u checking out his behind as well ...freak.
Nope ..its called being a freak. what ever happened to paying attention to his policies instead of the way he walks. Do every republican act this way?
I think it is somewhat odd that you are paying such attention to the way Obama walks. I also think that your conclusions are absurd.
No, since this, and idiotic responses to the Q, do not improve my 401k, I could give a flying rat.
Back to 3rd grade.
Obama is just an educated common street thug
never noticed that before but it%26#039;s awefully funny.
Very observant.
Damn, you are more observant than I am. I will have to check it out if I can ever stand watching the guy again.
No. I%26#039;m not that observant about the way other men walk..... Why are you checking other men out that closely?
It%26#039;s cuz his schlong goes down to his knee. Not his fault. :)
ROFL!
SO WHAT, WHO CARES
and is this any kind of problem? i do not have any problem with it
and? what%26#039;s it to you, creep?
%0D%0A
the first time I saw him walk after being elected I thought something was wrong with his leg.... then he was all about shooting hoops, so nah...
He be shuckin and jivin,dawg!
%26quot;AND NOOOOBODDY MESSES WIT JOE !!!%26quot;
When Obama speaks, what I hear in his voice is 80% %26quot;Reverend%26quot; Wright, and 20% Jon Lovitz (Ralphie the Liar)
How come the republicans went along with crazy bush and his antics and spending a trillion dollars in Iraq then realize their moment of descent and moment of bravery when the Democrats came into power ja?
This is either weird or something else., are u checking out his behind as well ...freak.
Nope ..its called being a freak. what ever happened to paying attention to his policies instead of the way he walks. Do every republican act this way?
I think it is somewhat odd that you are paying such attention to the way Obama walks. I also think that your conclusions are absurd.
No, since this, and idiotic responses to the Q, do not improve my 401k, I could give a flying rat.
Back to 3rd grade.
Obama is just an educated common street thug
never noticed that before but it%26#039;s awefully funny.
Very observant.
Damn, you are more observant than I am. I will have to check it out if I can ever stand watching the guy again.
No. I%26#039;m not that observant about the way other men walk..... Why are you checking other men out that closely?
It%26#039;s cuz his schlong goes down to his knee. Not his fault. :)
ROFL!
SO WHAT, WHO CARES
and is this any kind of problem? i do not have any problem with it
and? what%26#039;s it to you, creep?
%0D%0A
What is the financial situation of the New York Times Company?
About to go belly up as it it should.
Unsustainable. They will be a victim of their own errant policies, and good riddance to them and all that have sucked off the teet of liberalism to have a job they had no qualifications for.
GE owns the Times...
They (as a whole) lost $300 BILLION last year.
Jeff Immelt (CEO) took government bailout money, and he gets to keep his job... Considering all this, I don't see how the Times (or NBC) can survive...
Ever since they were racked by multiple palgerism scandles, and the rise of internet news....not good....
Downward spiral since they delivered the Obamanation to our doorsteps.
all newspapers are in trouble, with the rise of the internet,,,
the next to fall will be free televison
Lower then the approval rating of President Obama~~Obama is tanked
They are going down for the count.
And deserve their punishment.
Like their opinions..Junk Bond status.
Dive, dive, dive.
Crash & burn baby!
i use it to line my cat box..he likes to poop on it.
Unsustainable. They will be a victim of their own errant policies, and good riddance to them and all that have sucked off the teet of liberalism to have a job they had no qualifications for.
GE owns the Times...
They (as a whole) lost $300 BILLION last year.
Jeff Immelt (CEO) took government bailout money, and he gets to keep his job... Considering all this, I don't see how the Times (or NBC) can survive...
Ever since they were racked by multiple palgerism scandles, and the rise of internet news....not good....
Downward spiral since they delivered the Obamanation to our doorsteps.
all newspapers are in trouble, with the rise of the internet,,,
the next to fall will be free televison
Lower then the approval rating of President Obama~~Obama is tanked
They are going down for the count.
And deserve their punishment.
Like their opinions..Junk Bond status.
Dive, dive, dive.
Crash & burn baby!
i use it to line my cat box..he likes to poop on it.
Will there ever be a Slavic union?
Will there ever be a union of all Slavic countries? Slavs of the world, unite?
No, too many religious bigots on all sides
i wish. but, sadly, like the rest of europe, have muslim immigrants who want to further their heritage/religion and obliterate the slavic peoples.
UNITE!!!!! LOL; what are you, the Power Rangers?
You are funny,
What would the world do for models.
did you leave out the e in Slavs, or did you mean something else
No, too many religious bigots on all sides
i wish. but, sadly, like the rest of europe, have muslim immigrants who want to further their heritage/religion and obliterate the slavic peoples.
UNITE!!!!! LOL; what are you, the Power Rangers?
You are funny,
What would the world do for models.
did you leave out the e in Slavs, or did you mean something else
Do you think that Obama winning the US presidential election is going to be the biggest april fool in history?
The biggest April fool in history is going to be when people realize that our elections are a giant sham.
I still don%26#039;t understand how Republicans have so much raw utter devilish pure hatred of the man after only 7 weeks.
I just look at the political section of Y!Answers and all I see from Republicans is hate hate hate.
Where do Republicans hate so much. I could never be part of a political party that has so much hate. All you are about is slander slander slander. All I hear is more and more hate filled speech and ever increasing offensive names for the President from the Conservatives.
No wonder you lost the White House. There is nothing but hate on the right.
No, nope, not at all. It already happend with Bush both of them.
GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA
P.S.
GO OBAMA OBAMA IS GREAT OBAMA IS GREAT OBAMA IS GREAT
Yes it is after his polls drop below say 50% the media will have no choice but to turn on him.He%26#039;ll be sent packing in 2012.His loss will be blamed on the media.They helped put in and they can take him out.
no more like the biggest november fool
we can even say january
Youre still in denial huh?
So much for your permanent majority.
No. GW Bush already has that honor. Twice.
America is full of fools now.. that is how the liberal socialist got elected.
I think only an idiot thinks that US elections are held on April 1st.
Bingo, right on.
Eh no, its not an April fools joke, it happened last November, did you just wake up out of a coma?
No it is for real.
only on you
What about the other 11 months?
No, I don%26#039;t. I think he will be a great president. Let%26#039;s move on from this stuff, shall we?
%0D%0A
I still don%26#039;t understand how Republicans have so much raw utter devilish pure hatred of the man after only 7 weeks.
I just look at the political section of Y!Answers and all I see from Republicans is hate hate hate.
Where do Republicans hate so much. I could never be part of a political party that has so much hate. All you are about is slander slander slander. All I hear is more and more hate filled speech and ever increasing offensive names for the President from the Conservatives.
No wonder you lost the White House. There is nothing but hate on the right.
No, nope, not at all. It already happend with Bush both of them.
GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA GO OBAMA
P.S.
GO OBAMA OBAMA IS GREAT OBAMA IS GREAT OBAMA IS GREAT
Yes it is after his polls drop below say 50% the media will have no choice but to turn on him.He%26#039;ll be sent packing in 2012.His loss will be blamed on the media.They helped put in and they can take him out.
no more like the biggest november fool
we can even say january
Youre still in denial huh?
So much for your permanent majority.
No. GW Bush already has that honor. Twice.
America is full of fools now.. that is how the liberal socialist got elected.
I think only an idiot thinks that US elections are held on April 1st.
Bingo, right on.
Eh no, its not an April fools joke, it happened last November, did you just wake up out of a coma?
No it is for real.
only on you
What about the other 11 months?
No, I don%26#039;t. I think he will be a great president. Let%26#039;s move on from this stuff, shall we?
%0D%0A
How old is Vice President Joe Biden?
He's 66 years old. He was born in Nov. 1942. He was 30 years old -- the minimum -- when he was first sworn in as a Senator in Jan. 1973.
He so old that dust comes out his ears when he thinks.
That's why he doesn't.
pretty old. I think he's in his 60s maybe late 60s?
Old Pulgs, he is old enough to know better.
He so old that dust comes out his ears when he thinks.
That's why he doesn't.
pretty old. I think he's in his 60s maybe late 60s?
Old Pulgs, he is old enough to know better.
What is the president gonna do to help the poeple with no health insurance?
Hillary was going to do some pretty good things for us, or at least try. Will Obama pick up and try to help us out? I can't afford health coverage but yet, can't qualify for state assistance. That doesn't make sense. Broke is broke ppl. ANd I'm broke!
Hillary's new mission is to get universal health care for the whole world now.
As for the poor in this country, they already have Medicad, Medicare, the VA, Indian Health Services and the Emergency Rooms across the country.
I guess the only thing left is to put a government run dispensary in every zip code area and then you can be triage and rationed health care in regional government run hospitals if you can't or won't get other coverage. I'm sure a Value Added Tax will be imposed on everyone to pay for it just like they do in Europe.
Remember you get what you pay for, except when it is a government program.
He's going to tax the crap out of those who work and ruin the best health care system in the world.
Is that good?
He's going to give all the new jobs to illegals - oh, I guess that won't help you.
Better get healthy.
Get them to walk into the Hospice.
Make sure they die so they don't make him look bad.
.
give you free health care which means no health care
Hillary's new mission is to get universal health care for the whole world now.
As for the poor in this country, they already have Medicad, Medicare, the VA, Indian Health Services and the Emergency Rooms across the country.
I guess the only thing left is to put a government run dispensary in every zip code area and then you can be triage and rationed health care in regional government run hospitals if you can't or won't get other coverage. I'm sure a Value Added Tax will be imposed on everyone to pay for it just like they do in Europe.
Remember you get what you pay for, except when it is a government program.
He's going to tax the crap out of those who work and ruin the best health care system in the world.
Is that good?
He's going to give all the new jobs to illegals - oh, I guess that won't help you.
Better get healthy.
Get them to walk into the Hospice.
Make sure they die so they don't make him look bad.
.
give you free health care which means no health care
Question for Politics
Is Watchmen a political Rorschach test? Do you think that people can see into it what they want to? Is this deliberate? What do you think of the work philosophical themes?
You are astute. Watchmen *IS* a Rorschach test--you see in it what you want to see in it. And yes, that was deliberately done.
Some people read the graphic novel then saw the movie and thought it was a let-down: they were expecting to see on the screen what they saw on the page. These people cannot let go of their own pre-conceived notions of what it *should* be.
Some people didn't read the graphic novel and thought the movie was either too long, too boring, or whatever. Honestly, I don't know what they expected to see because I wasn't one of these people.
Some people read the novel and saw the movie and thought it was well-done and well-made...people like me. It captured the grittiness of the graphic novel and managed to include all the essential elements even though little things here and there were changed.
The problem with Watchmen is that so many of the characters are correct in their worldview. Rorschach is right--we make the world and see what we want. The Comedian is right--lots of things in life are just big jokes...and sometimes the joke is on us. Ozymandias is right--the only way to solve some problems is to think outside the box. Dr. Manhattan is right--trivial details are trivial and we cannot always see the greater pattern as to how life unfolds.
The character we, the audience, are really supposed to identify with most closely is Nite Owl II. At the beginning of the story he is uncertain and afraid, but when he realizes that he can make a difference he loses these disadvantages. Nevertheless, he always holds true to his ideals and maintains a practical, level-headed clarity throughout the story.
movies w/any political message tend to make me sick..this is why hollywood hasnt been doing very well... i watch a movie to be entertained not preached to.
You are astute. Watchmen *IS* a Rorschach test--you see in it what you want to see in it. And yes, that was deliberately done.
Some people read the graphic novel then saw the movie and thought it was a let-down: they were expecting to see on the screen what they saw on the page. These people cannot let go of their own pre-conceived notions of what it *should* be.
Some people didn't read the graphic novel and thought the movie was either too long, too boring, or whatever. Honestly, I don't know what they expected to see because I wasn't one of these people.
Some people read the novel and saw the movie and thought it was well-done and well-made...people like me. It captured the grittiness of the graphic novel and managed to include all the essential elements even though little things here and there were changed.
The problem with Watchmen is that so many of the characters are correct in their worldview. Rorschach is right--we make the world and see what we want. The Comedian is right--lots of things in life are just big jokes...and sometimes the joke is on us. Ozymandias is right--the only way to solve some problems is to think outside the box. Dr. Manhattan is right--trivial details are trivial and we cannot always see the greater pattern as to how life unfolds.
The character we, the audience, are really supposed to identify with most closely is Nite Owl II. At the beginning of the story he is uncertain and afraid, but when he realizes that he can make a difference he loses these disadvantages. Nevertheless, he always holds true to his ideals and maintains a practical, level-headed clarity throughout the story.
movies w/any political message tend to make me sick..this is why hollywood hasnt been doing very well... i watch a movie to be entertained not preached to.
Do you think Obama can fix?
The US and get our troops out of Iraq
I don't know. Bush has dug us a pretty deep hole. But he has a better chance than McCain, whose sole idea was another tax cut. Ignoring the fact that the last round of tax cuts, and the round before that failed to keep us out of this recession in the first place.
He IS getting out troops out of Iraq.
"fix the US"? Uh, that's a bit broad and vague.
He's helping the US, making things better for us.
What do you really know about Iraq? Nothing.
Nothing gets me more fired up than people shouting about getting our troops out of Iraq when they really don't know anything about what is going on there.
yea and he's putting them into afghanistan, so much for saving money by stopping the Iraq war.........another lie
He'll spend lots and lots of money and we will have nothing to show for it but colossal record breaking debt.
yes her WILL ppl have faith x x x x x x
Best he can do is n rig it.
No.
Hell no!
wait
going to take some time but i think so.
Yes
I don't know. Bush has dug us a pretty deep hole. But he has a better chance than McCain, whose sole idea was another tax cut. Ignoring the fact that the last round of tax cuts, and the round before that failed to keep us out of this recession in the first place.
He IS getting out troops out of Iraq.
"fix the US"? Uh, that's a bit broad and vague.
He's helping the US, making things better for us.
What do you really know about Iraq? Nothing.
Nothing gets me more fired up than people shouting about getting our troops out of Iraq when they really don't know anything about what is going on there.
yea and he's putting them into afghanistan, so much for saving money by stopping the Iraq war.........another lie
He'll spend lots and lots of money and we will have nothing to show for it but colossal record breaking debt.
yes her WILL ppl have faith x x x x x x
Best he can do is n rig it.
No.
Hell no!
wait
going to take some time but i think so.
Yes
Is abortion unconscionable for an American woman?
The only reason a person cant afford to take care of a baby in this country is laziness. If youre an African woman who has been raped and beaten and become an outcast then I can understand their reason for aborting to save their child from starvation but that doesnt have to happen here in America.
Of course not.
You don%26#039;t at all understand why females get abortions. Educate yourself first. Maybe you%26#039;ll get a clue.
Do you REALLY think that money is the ONLY thing it takes to have and raise a child?
Laziness is the only reason??
I went to high school, and I can%26#039;t tell you how many of the girls I went to high school with lived with the fear of if they ever got pregnant, they would be kicked out of their homes and basically disowned by their families. At the age of 15, that is a pretty scary concept in itself. I couldn%26#039;t imagine having to be 15, can%26#039;t get a job, have no means of supporting a baby, no way to pay any bills, can%26#039;t find a place to live, and then try to raise a child when I would be a child myself??
And all you have to do is look at the news to see how many children are murdered, neglected and beaten by their parents that didn%26#039;t want them in the first place, but were %26quot;stuck%26quot; with them (in their minds). Children deserve to be loved, and if someone can%26#039;t give a child that love, I would rather them have an abortion than abuse and then murder the child later on - like age 3 when they are in the %26quot;naughty%26quot; stage, and it isn%26#039;t their fault that their parent(s) are angry with them.
Children are murdered daily FOR NO REASON. Where is your outrage and compassion for them? Oh, but it is okay for them to be murdered, right? After all, their parents chose life, didn%26#039;t they?
When all of the children in this nation are in loving homes with families that can support them and give them what they need, and there are no homeless, starving, diseased children being beaten because they %26quot;are%26quot;, then there will be no need for abortion. I will then be against it. But until you can provide that world, there will be the need. Sorry if this goes against your views and beliefs, but I would rather a baby be aborted than a toddler be beaten to death for no reason.
I don%26#039;t think so, the only reason should be medical, for the mother life or the baby life, this is because of the failing family life, Rape is a very terrible crime. I would like to see these people go to prison, for along time, but life is still a gift. To cluster of cell to single cell organism on mars, this is all life, weather you think so or not! There are many of medical reason not to have an abortion, but i only need one! pro-life
The consensus amonst Christians is that the soul of an aborted fetus goes straight on up to Heaven and into the loving arms of our Lord for all of eternity.
Why is that bad?
Every soul that is born into life is subjected to possible corruption by Satan which means an eternal life spent in hell...most Christians also agree that getting to Heaven is a tough thing to do and that most souls born into life do wind up being corrrupted by Satan.
Satan is certainly AGAINST abortion because he does NOT get ANY chance to corrupt the aborted soul...
God does work in mysterious ways and God does have the power to stop any and all abortions....yet he does little. Hmmm, could be that the Will of God is to allow abortions so that those souls will GO DIRECTLY TO HEAVEN and bypass possible corruption entirely.
So....whose side are you on again? And if you are anti-abortion...how does it feel to share something in common with Satan?
Why, in your opinion, is it only understandable for an African American woman? Are they the only ones who have this happen to them, in your mind? There are plenty of reasons why some should not have a child. Do you not live in the real world? Ever heard of spousal abuse and child abuse by the %26quot;man%26quot; of the house? Why would a woman want to bring a child into that kind of environment? What if she%26#039;s young and already lives in poverty even though she works full time? I could go on and on. You, my friend seem out of touch with reality.
I feel bad for the children of the octuplet mom. And by the way, why is it that women think that the baby is %26quot;their body%26quot;? It%26#039;s just as much of their body as it is the male%26#039;s. They%26#039;re just carrying it. I don%26#039;t agree with the it%26#039;s my body and I%26#039;ll do what i want with it philosophy. However, i personally don%26#039;t consider a 2 month fetus to be a human. But that%26#039;s my opinion.
i can%26#039;t imagine how difficult it would be to raise a child as a single high school educated teen mom....that is unless you have wealthy parents.
average real income in the US hasn%26#039;t gone up in the last 8 years....meanwhile costs have risen dramatically.
Whatever happens I believe the baby ought to live since it wasn%26#039;t his fault and in 50% of the cases it was partly the mother%26#039;s fault who didn%26#039;t think it twice before screwing someone
My friend was raped and her child is the sweetest little angel. People who use the rape excuse are still committing murder and two wrongs don%26#039;t make a right.
Yes, I agree, all rape victims impregnated by their attackers are rich!!!
Do you even think before you post such crap?
It is unconscionable for some, perfectly acceptable for others.
You have no idea what you%26#039;re talking about. Judge not lest you be judged. Our government needs to stay out of women%26#039;s bodies.
... or they lost their job and can%26#039;t find another one that will pay enough to support her and her child.
%0D%0A
Of course not.
You don%26#039;t at all understand why females get abortions. Educate yourself first. Maybe you%26#039;ll get a clue.
Do you REALLY think that money is the ONLY thing it takes to have and raise a child?
Laziness is the only reason??
I went to high school, and I can%26#039;t tell you how many of the girls I went to high school with lived with the fear of if they ever got pregnant, they would be kicked out of their homes and basically disowned by their families. At the age of 15, that is a pretty scary concept in itself. I couldn%26#039;t imagine having to be 15, can%26#039;t get a job, have no means of supporting a baby, no way to pay any bills, can%26#039;t find a place to live, and then try to raise a child when I would be a child myself??
And all you have to do is look at the news to see how many children are murdered, neglected and beaten by their parents that didn%26#039;t want them in the first place, but were %26quot;stuck%26quot; with them (in their minds). Children deserve to be loved, and if someone can%26#039;t give a child that love, I would rather them have an abortion than abuse and then murder the child later on - like age 3 when they are in the %26quot;naughty%26quot; stage, and it isn%26#039;t their fault that their parent(s) are angry with them.
Children are murdered daily FOR NO REASON. Where is your outrage and compassion for them? Oh, but it is okay for them to be murdered, right? After all, their parents chose life, didn%26#039;t they?
When all of the children in this nation are in loving homes with families that can support them and give them what they need, and there are no homeless, starving, diseased children being beaten because they %26quot;are%26quot;, then there will be no need for abortion. I will then be against it. But until you can provide that world, there will be the need. Sorry if this goes against your views and beliefs, but I would rather a baby be aborted than a toddler be beaten to death for no reason.
I don%26#039;t think so, the only reason should be medical, for the mother life or the baby life, this is because of the failing family life, Rape is a very terrible crime. I would like to see these people go to prison, for along time, but life is still a gift. To cluster of cell to single cell organism on mars, this is all life, weather you think so or not! There are many of medical reason not to have an abortion, but i only need one! pro-life
The consensus amonst Christians is that the soul of an aborted fetus goes straight on up to Heaven and into the loving arms of our Lord for all of eternity.
Why is that bad?
Every soul that is born into life is subjected to possible corruption by Satan which means an eternal life spent in hell...most Christians also agree that getting to Heaven is a tough thing to do and that most souls born into life do wind up being corrrupted by Satan.
Satan is certainly AGAINST abortion because he does NOT get ANY chance to corrupt the aborted soul...
God does work in mysterious ways and God does have the power to stop any and all abortions....yet he does little. Hmmm, could be that the Will of God is to allow abortions so that those souls will GO DIRECTLY TO HEAVEN and bypass possible corruption entirely.
So....whose side are you on again? And if you are anti-abortion...how does it feel to share something in common with Satan?
Why, in your opinion, is it only understandable for an African American woman? Are they the only ones who have this happen to them, in your mind? There are plenty of reasons why some should not have a child. Do you not live in the real world? Ever heard of spousal abuse and child abuse by the %26quot;man%26quot; of the house? Why would a woman want to bring a child into that kind of environment? What if she%26#039;s young and already lives in poverty even though she works full time? I could go on and on. You, my friend seem out of touch with reality.
I feel bad for the children of the octuplet mom. And by the way, why is it that women think that the baby is %26quot;their body%26quot;? It%26#039;s just as much of their body as it is the male%26#039;s. They%26#039;re just carrying it. I don%26#039;t agree with the it%26#039;s my body and I%26#039;ll do what i want with it philosophy. However, i personally don%26#039;t consider a 2 month fetus to be a human. But that%26#039;s my opinion.
i can%26#039;t imagine how difficult it would be to raise a child as a single high school educated teen mom....that is unless you have wealthy parents.
average real income in the US hasn%26#039;t gone up in the last 8 years....meanwhile costs have risen dramatically.
Whatever happens I believe the baby ought to live since it wasn%26#039;t his fault and in 50% of the cases it was partly the mother%26#039;s fault who didn%26#039;t think it twice before screwing someone
My friend was raped and her child is the sweetest little angel. People who use the rape excuse are still committing murder and two wrongs don%26#039;t make a right.
Yes, I agree, all rape victims impregnated by their attackers are rich!!!
Do you even think before you post such crap?
It is unconscionable for some, perfectly acceptable for others.
You have no idea what you%26#039;re talking about. Judge not lest you be judged. Our government needs to stay out of women%26#039;s bodies.
... or they lost their job and can%26#039;t find another one that will pay enough to support her and her child.
%0D%0A
Could America fix it
That perky Progressive chick from the commercials and that Gecko insist we could save a pile of cash by switching.
hahahahaha yes I think so
Someone should tell Obama this; He just keeps giving it to anyone with a sad story! Everyone has a sad story--buck up!
Progressive and that chick both suck.
Geico is cool so I say we go with that.
Tell me who's watchin....
hahahahaha yes I think so
Someone should tell Obama this; He just keeps giving it to anyone with a sad story! Everyone has a sad story--buck up!
Progressive and that chick both suck.
Geico is cool so I say we go with that.
Tell me who's watchin....
How do you PERSONALLY benefit from Obama
Okay, this is for everyone but specially for the people who voted for him.
How do YOU benefit, give me concrete examples. I don't wanna hear abstract generalizations like 'he's gonna improve this country', or 'he's the first black president and that's enough'.
I wanna know what it does for you, not for poor people, your neighbor or the environment, so give me some concrete examples about yourself. If you can tell me how or if you benefit from the stimulus bill, that would be cool too.
I don't benefit. I'm sixteen years old. My generation is the one that's going to pay for all of this nonsense.
Most of that remains to be seen. How many instances can we give after the man has been in office just short of 3 months. One benefit I can identify is that since my family is chock full of cancer victims the support of embryonic stem cell research may save my life someday. There is much that adult stem cell research cannot do. That benefits me now because I sleep better at night knowing everything that can be done is being done in that regard.
Also, it benefits my family that my cousin, a police officer in Pennsylvania, may get to keep his job due to the stimulus package. That benefits my family because if he loses his job he comes back here and will have to stay with us, since we have the room for him. I don't begrudge my cousin if he needs helps, but up goes the grocery bill, the gas/electric bill, and having to cover any medications he needs.
Why should I have to benefit personally? I'm middle aged, okay financially, and generally happy with my life. But I recognize that it's not all about me. It's about setting a direction that will make my children's life better in the years ahead. It's about taking care of those that are less fortunate than me. We are all born equal, but we do not all have equal opportunities in life.
Health care is most important to me. Although I have what I think is adequate insurance, I am still one major illness away from catastrophe. Hopefully, President Obama will change that for me and millions of others.
I voted for Obama. I dont expect to personally gain one thing from his presidency. I am an independent person, and I did not gain a darn thing from Bush, Clinton, Carter, Bush.....ect...... I never got one darn thing from any of them. I had some gains when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Bill. Since then, none of them have don anything for me to see any gain from. I voted for Obama because I thought he was the best choice for the country. NOT because I expected to personally gain anything whatsoever. TRY AGAIN...... Not everyone who voted for Obama is sitting on their butt waiting for some kind of check. We work for a living miss! Thank You!
I like this question but you won't get liberals to answer honestly. They don't think that way. If Obama says it's good for America, that's good enough for them.
The proof are the inane answers you get on YA when you try to pin them down.
I personally benefit from the excitement and enthusiasm I feel. For the first time in years, I want to get involved and I get a HUGE amount of personal gratification from that.
Nothing. And personally, I am afraid of what more he is going to do TO me. Nearly half of my investments are gone. I was going to live out my retirement on that money. Now I will have to die in, let me see - about 6-8 years.
I'm black and he's black. We can relate.
well I got more money in my paycheck today so that's a start
it's way too early to tell.
How do YOU benefit, give me concrete examples. I don't wanna hear abstract generalizations like 'he's gonna improve this country', or 'he's the first black president and that's enough'.
I wanna know what it does for you, not for poor people, your neighbor or the environment, so give me some concrete examples about yourself. If you can tell me how or if you benefit from the stimulus bill, that would be cool too.
I don't benefit. I'm sixteen years old. My generation is the one that's going to pay for all of this nonsense.
Most of that remains to be seen. How many instances can we give after the man has been in office just short of 3 months. One benefit I can identify is that since my family is chock full of cancer victims the support of embryonic stem cell research may save my life someday. There is much that adult stem cell research cannot do. That benefits me now because I sleep better at night knowing everything that can be done is being done in that regard.
Also, it benefits my family that my cousin, a police officer in Pennsylvania, may get to keep his job due to the stimulus package. That benefits my family because if he loses his job he comes back here and will have to stay with us, since we have the room for him. I don't begrudge my cousin if he needs helps, but up goes the grocery bill, the gas/electric bill, and having to cover any medications he needs.
Why should I have to benefit personally? I'm middle aged, okay financially, and generally happy with my life. But I recognize that it's not all about me. It's about setting a direction that will make my children's life better in the years ahead. It's about taking care of those that are less fortunate than me. We are all born equal, but we do not all have equal opportunities in life.
Health care is most important to me. Although I have what I think is adequate insurance, I am still one major illness away from catastrophe. Hopefully, President Obama will change that for me and millions of others.
I voted for Obama. I dont expect to personally gain one thing from his presidency. I am an independent person, and I did not gain a darn thing from Bush, Clinton, Carter, Bush.....ect...... I never got one darn thing from any of them. I had some gains when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Bill. Since then, none of them have don anything for me to see any gain from. I voted for Obama because I thought he was the best choice for the country. NOT because I expected to personally gain anything whatsoever. TRY AGAIN...... Not everyone who voted for Obama is sitting on their butt waiting for some kind of check. We work for a living miss! Thank You!
I like this question but you won't get liberals to answer honestly. They don't think that way. If Obama says it's good for America, that's good enough for them.
The proof are the inane answers you get on YA when you try to pin them down.
I personally benefit from the excitement and enthusiasm I feel. For the first time in years, I want to get involved and I get a HUGE amount of personal gratification from that.
Nothing. And personally, I am afraid of what more he is going to do TO me. Nearly half of my investments are gone. I was going to live out my retirement on that money. Now I will have to die in, let me see - about 6-8 years.
I'm black and he's black. We can relate.
well I got more money in my paycheck today so that's a start
it's way too early to tell.
GWB said this as a joke, taking off of Lincoln
1) You can fool some of the people all the time,
and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.
George W. Bush
2) You can fool some of the people all of the time,
and all of the people some of the time,
but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln (attributed)
1 and 2.
i never heard bush put it quite that way--i think he said "you can fool some of the people once and sometimes..well, fool me...(awkward pause) fool me once and don't fool me again"--i'm sure googling "bush's fool me video" will get you the desired exact --funny--quote. And yes, george really did mangle the quote, much like he mangled many other quotes--and no, he was not making a joke as the spinmeisters are fond of saying. Obama doesn't mangle like george did.
Your quote from GWB is way off! He wasn't trying to take off of Lincoln either so your question is irrelevant.
He was trying to say, "You fool me once shame on you. You fool me a second time shame on me."
Instead he said something like, " You fool me once shame on me, you fool me twice...uh...the point is you fool me once you can't fool me again."
I can think of a few slogans that fit Obama better.
1. If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you. If you make them really think, they'll hate you. (I don't know who first said this.)
2. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
3. Whenever anything happens, there are people who make it happen, there are people who stand in the way of it happening, and then there are people who weren't involved who wonder what the hell happened. (I think this might have been Tip O'Neil).
4. If the facts don't suit your side, do what you can to confuse the issues. If you can't dazzle 'em with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t. (Actually at this point that would go better for the Republican leadership.)
Bush wasn't really joking. That was one of the policies of his administration. The quotes don't apply to President Obama. He is actually trying to address the problems and he actually doesn't have time to think about fooling people. The results of his efforts are and will be obvious.
Both actually!
I came accross a paragraph today in the novel I'm currently reading that made me laugh...
"You have to trust yourself, he continued, and let the princes of the world get along as best they could with the people that elected them. Most time's that wasn't very well, but that's okay; they deserved each other."
Actually, Bush said, "They have a saying in Texas, I'm sure they have it here in Tennessee that fool me once...uhm, you can fool some of the people ...uhm...you won't get fooled again!"
(At least get the bridbrain's quote right...)
1
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.
Theodore Roosevelt
i think bob marley said something like that also... something about weed...
none of them describes Obama
and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.
George W. Bush
2) You can fool some of the people all of the time,
and all of the people some of the time,
but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln (attributed)
1 and 2.
i never heard bush put it quite that way--i think he said "you can fool some of the people once and sometimes..well, fool me...(awkward pause) fool me once and don't fool me again"--i'm sure googling "bush's fool me video" will get you the desired exact --funny--quote. And yes, george really did mangle the quote, much like he mangled many other quotes--and no, he was not making a joke as the spinmeisters are fond of saying. Obama doesn't mangle like george did.
Your quote from GWB is way off! He wasn't trying to take off of Lincoln either so your question is irrelevant.
He was trying to say, "You fool me once shame on you. You fool me a second time shame on me."
Instead he said something like, " You fool me once shame on me, you fool me twice...uh...the point is you fool me once you can't fool me again."
I can think of a few slogans that fit Obama better.
1. If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you. If you make them really think, they'll hate you. (I don't know who first said this.)
2. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
3. Whenever anything happens, there are people who make it happen, there are people who stand in the way of it happening, and then there are people who weren't involved who wonder what the hell happened. (I think this might have been Tip O'Neil).
4. If the facts don't suit your side, do what you can to confuse the issues. If you can't dazzle 'em with your brilliance, baffle 'em with your bullsh*t. (Actually at this point that would go better for the Republican leadership.)
Bush wasn't really joking. That was one of the policies of his administration. The quotes don't apply to President Obama. He is actually trying to address the problems and he actually doesn't have time to think about fooling people. The results of his efforts are and will be obvious.
Both actually!
I came accross a paragraph today in the novel I'm currently reading that made me laugh...
"You have to trust yourself, he continued, and let the princes of the world get along as best they could with the people that elected them. Most time's that wasn't very well, but that's okay; they deserved each other."
Actually, Bush said, "They have a saying in Texas, I'm sure they have it here in Tennessee that fool me once...uhm, you can fool some of the people ...uhm...you won't get fooled again!"
(At least get the bridbrain's quote right...)
1
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president.
Theodore Roosevelt
i think bob marley said something like that also... something about weed...
none of them describes Obama
When can I join the military?
I%26#039;m 15 right now and I am a freshman in high school I know it is a little early but I have a few questions. I have a later birthday and i turn 16 before my sophomore year. Which means I will be 17 before my junior year of high school. I was wondering if I had to be a junior to enter the forces.
you must be 17 and a HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE as well as have your parents permission in order to enlist. Only rising seniors may enter DEP.
With your parents written consent, you will be able to join the %26#039;delayed entry program%26#039; (DEP) at 17. Usually with the DEP, recruits will go to BCT during the summer between their junior and senior years, and then leave for AIT once they graduate. Some MOS%26#039;s that have very short AIT%26#039;s may be able to complete BCT and AIT during the summer before and then go directly to their duty station after high school graduation. If your 17th b-day is during the summer between sophomore and junior, I highly doubt you will be able to go that summer just because you may have to wait for the next BCT class and it may run into junior year starting in the fall.
yes. you have to be finished with ur junior year. then your parents can sign a waver saying that you can go to BCT *bootcamp* during your
summer goin to your senior year. then when you finish BCT you will
come back and finish your senior year.. then you will get stationed somewhere.
17 with parents consent is correct...but...you will need a GED at minimum. If you are lucky enough to be the first 10% that year, otherwise you will need a GED and college credits.
your parents have to sign that its ok for you to go if you are 17
There are so many more things you can do with your life....why would you want to fight for a country that isn%26#039;t true to its own citizens. This war is a F***king joke!
Why would you want to serve a country that is in the middle of collapse and ruled by murderers?
%0D%0A
you must be 17 and a HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE as well as have your parents permission in order to enlist. Only rising seniors may enter DEP.
With your parents written consent, you will be able to join the %26#039;delayed entry program%26#039; (DEP) at 17. Usually with the DEP, recruits will go to BCT during the summer between their junior and senior years, and then leave for AIT once they graduate. Some MOS%26#039;s that have very short AIT%26#039;s may be able to complete BCT and AIT during the summer before and then go directly to their duty station after high school graduation. If your 17th b-day is during the summer between sophomore and junior, I highly doubt you will be able to go that summer just because you may have to wait for the next BCT class and it may run into junior year starting in the fall.
yes. you have to be finished with ur junior year. then your parents can sign a waver saying that you can go to BCT *bootcamp* during your
summer goin to your senior year. then when you finish BCT you will
come back and finish your senior year.. then you will get stationed somewhere.
17 with parents consent is correct...but...you will need a GED at minimum. If you are lucky enough to be the first 10% that year, otherwise you will need a GED and college credits.
your parents have to sign that its ok for you to go if you are 17
There are so many more things you can do with your life....why would you want to fight for a country that isn%26#039;t true to its own citizens. This war is a F***king joke!
Why would you want to serve a country that is in the middle of collapse and ruled by murderers?
%0D%0A
My company being sued. Can my spouse do the Proof of Service?
Another company is sueing my company. Can my spouse sign the Proof of Service? I heard, but am not sure, something like they can't be a party...not sure. But it's my company, not hers and while my spouse assists me, they are not a paid employee. Will our Proof of Service papers be valid?
Part II of this Question: I also heard there's some law in business that you can't "testify against your spouse". Can we use this so that they can't be called as a witness by the other side?
If you have personal experience in either of these areas, I'd really appreciate your help.
If you are a party, she cannot make service. If only the company is a party, then it is probably OK. Most documents filed by the defendant do not need to be personally served. If they only need to be mailed, then anyone, including you, can sign the certificate saying it was mailed. The testimonial priviledge varies by state and country but in most places it applies only to criminal cases.
1. Corporations cannot be represented by a non-attorney, they MUST be represented by a licensed attorney. That's the price you pay for limited liability. So your wife should not be doing any legal work at all on this case - your attorney should be handling this.
2. The spousal immunity doctrine ONLY applies to testifying in criminal trials. If your spouse is getting called to testify about business practices, you're out of luck.
Get an attorney.
Part II of this Question: I also heard there's some law in business that you can't "testify against your spouse". Can we use this so that they can't be called as a witness by the other side?
If you have personal experience in either of these areas, I'd really appreciate your help.
If you are a party, she cannot make service. If only the company is a party, then it is probably OK. Most documents filed by the defendant do not need to be personally served. If they only need to be mailed, then anyone, including you, can sign the certificate saying it was mailed. The testimonial priviledge varies by state and country but in most places it applies only to criminal cases.
1. Corporations cannot be represented by a non-attorney, they MUST be represented by a licensed attorney. That's the price you pay for limited liability. So your wife should not be doing any legal work at all on this case - your attorney should be handling this.
2. The spousal immunity doctrine ONLY applies to testifying in criminal trials. If your spouse is getting called to testify about business practices, you're out of luck.
Get an attorney.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)