Who is they?Armelius wrote:Not sure if I can get this meter on this post but I will try.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Hmmm, anyways they are keeping track of all his promises during his campaign.
I think the St. Pete Times is an excellent paper and some of the journalist they had that died in foreign lands should be commended for their excellence.themadscientist wrote:T.H.E.Y.
TheHearsayExperts forYou
This is like giving a new born baby a bad credit score. This would have been a great post in 2012, but for now.... and so does that link!Armelius wrote:Not sure if I can get this meter on this post but I will try.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Hmmm, anyways they are keeping track of all his promises during his campaign.
I stuck that post into in Babelfish and I got this backArmelius wrote:For a new borne baby Obama sure knows how to campaign. Keeps people informed of what was promised and how many were kept.
It's what the forth estate should do. If you want it to suck then that is your problem.
The babelfish has yet to decode the complexities of the nonsense language. There are some who believe it is simply such a theoretical impossibility that it ranks among time travel in terms of probability for success. We are not meant to decipher such a language, it is simply over our heads. I trust NASA, or maybe Mensa will continue to work on this for us. In the mean time, we are only left with this humble acronym that shows our truly handicapped existences.themadscientist wrote:
I stuck that post into in Babelfish and I got this back
??????????WTF???????????
Ah a quote I can use.themadscientist wrote:That stick really is giving your heiny a hard time isn't it?
Since you are so intellectual may I assume your spelling and grammar errors are intentional?
Just keeping them there would make them a terrorlst. At least with Saddam he was given a kangaroo trial in a country that didn't even have a government established.audtatious wrote:Interesting page to follow. He is working on some of his promises at least regardless of whether or not the majority would consider it good or not.
Closing Gitmo tells me he puts the comfort of terrorists over the safety of us and other innocents. Does not surprise me as criminals in our own system have more rights than those they kill, torture, rob and maim. Wonder how many more stories like this we will see in the future? http://www.google.com/hostedne...HeW4Q
While "above his pay grade" he took relatively no time at all in removing the ban concerning supporting overseas abortions. Wonder how much federal money will go for that? Makes it moot for someone to be against abortion now as the money they pay for taxes will be used to provide them anyway. It's a shame how abortion has simply turned into another form of federally sponsored contraceptives. While I'm not for stopping abortions I feel it's absolutely insane for the federal gov (or any form of our gov) to help pay for it and to promote paying for it in other countries.
Way to go Obama. The ride has just begun....
Yeah, because the majority of them were innocently walking along when the big 'ole mean US military kidnapped them off the streets. So, we should give them full US rights to trial in which ultra-left lawyers get them released anyway as the military does not have a requirement to document the charges like the police do against US citizens. It's a catch-22 and I'd rather err on the side of those innocents who would be killed by those released.Armelius wrote:Just keeping them there would make them a terrorlst. At least with Saddam he was given a kangaroo trial in a country that didn't even have a government established.
Who's hands will the blood be on for them killing more people? We have unsuccessful killers in prison today, do you say we release them so we can try and kill them in the act later on?Armelius wrote:Let them go if the rearm then we kill them.
They can pay for it out of their own pockets. Food, shelter, education, healthcare, etc should be paid for via the taxpayer. Why should the taxpayer have to pay for their abortion?Armelius wrote:Someone in the military who wants an abortion should have the government pick up the tab.
When we have a trial we are able to cross examine witnesses and challenge the evidence. For them they get nothing. They won't get a trial and even if they do it would resemble something like Noriega out of Panama.audtatious wrote:
Yeah, because the majority of them were innocently walking along when the big 'ole mean US military kidnapped them off the streets. So, we should give them full US rights to trial in which ultra-left lawyers get them released anyway as the military does not have a requirement to document the charges like the police do against US citizens. It's a catch-22 and I'd rather err on the side of those innocents who would be killed by those released. You did solve one question I had in my head, how long before someone made the statement that us having them in custody is what would be the eventual excuse for those released going back to killing people.Who's hands will the blood be on for them killing more people? We have unsuccessful killers in prison today, do you say we release them so we can try and kill them in the act later on?They can pay for it out of their own pockets. Food, shelter, education, healthcare, etc should be paid for via the taxpayer. Why should the taxpayer have to pay for their abortion?
I think it has more to do with the fact that the 13 colonies were settled by English-speaking people. I doubt even blokes in an English pub are discussing Queen Nabb in Shakespearean-era english.Armelius wrote:Shakespeare is why we speak or write in English today. The gibberish is your newspeak rarely knowing the true meaning of a word. Why do you think we have so many attorneys?
It would have been based on military law, not civilian.Armelius wrote:
When we have a trial we are able to cross examine witnesses and challenge the evidence. For them they get nothing. They won't get a trial and even if they do it would resemble something like Noriega out of Panama.
The Nazis wore uniforms. These terrorists are not prisoners of war nor should what they do be considered honorable. There is a difference.Armelius wrote:If I was in prison for that long with no trial, I probably would become a terrorlst...no, I would become something bigger than that. We gave the Nazis (or upper echelon) a trial. Do you think the terrorists are worse than Nazis?
Really? I thought it was both? What about those who will never get out of prison?Armelius wrote:The unsuccessful killers in our prison system had a trial or plead guilty. They usually don't get the death penalty and eventually are released. Our prisons are supposed to be there for rehabilitation not punishment.
What does that have to do with the price of cheese? What do you propose, mandatory abortions for those who may not be good parents based upon some inane guideline? Who sets the guideline?Armelius wrote:The last question would be easy if abortions are cheaper than having to have long term commitments of health and welfare of children by a self centered parent who might have their child taken away from them by using drugs, neglect or naming their children after world leaders that fought US soldiers and lost.
Because the executive branch has jurisdiction?audtatious wrote:
It would have been based on military law, not civilian.
Not as a national language. The Aussies and the Americans don't speak shakesperean English, neither do modern English. The populace, not the band of course.Armelius wrote:Germans do speak English. You ever been to Germany? English is spoken by most airline pilots in the world as well. I am using your statement that the English founded the 13 colonies (primarily) so it should go we would call lawyers barristers not attorneys. Because they are English means you didn't know what attorney meant in the first place. Probably don't know why barristers are called barristers.