Revise the following statements to de-emphasize the bad news. (Hint: Minimize the space devoted to the bad new?
a. We can’t refund your money for the malfunctioning lamp. You shouldn’t have placed a 250-watt bulb in the fixture socket; it’s guaranteed for a maximum of 75 watts. b. I’m sorry to tell you we can’t supply the custom decorations you requested. We called every supplier and none of them can do what you want on such short notice. You can, however, get a standard decorative package on the same theme in time. I found a supplier that stocks these. Of course, it won’t have quite the flair you originally requested.
Which of the following statements about the Cold War is false?
A. .it encouraged free expression of ideas in America concerning itself and the global affairs of the time period B. the national pre-occupation with the Soviets (in the 1940s) helped discredit socialists and others on the "Left", and sapped the vitality of New Deal liberalism C. it led to a massive debt in the 1980s, sparked waves of paranoia in the early 1950s, and impacted ever presidential election during the 1940s-1980s D.two superpowers avoided a direct military clash, yet used all their available resources around the globe to thwart the other's objectives E. it fundamentally affected the US politically, socially and economically--plunging it into a global struggle to contain the USSR and stop communism
Which Progressive President said " I have unwittingly ruined my country"?
That quote is attributed to Woodrow Wilson but it is fake. I can prove it for anyone willing to learn something. The first two sentences are not found anywhere within any of Woodrow Wilson's writings and no reliable source exists for hearing him say any such thing. The rest of the quote was actually spoken or written by Woodrow Wilson, however, it is not in reference to the Federal Reserve. Those portions of the quote are taken from Woodrow Wilson's book, "The New Freedom". That book was published in 1913 and is a compilation of some of Woodrow Wilson's campaign speeches he made while campaigning for President in 1911 and 1912. Since the Federal Reserve didn't even exist yet, it is obvious that he was not discussing it. For those who are interested in reality and not just conspiracy theory nonsense, you can read Woodrow Wilson's book at The Project Gutenberg website at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14811/148... BTW, in reference to JFK and his assassination made by another poster, JFK's Executive Order EO 11110 was in reference to SILVER CERTIFICATES and not United States Notes. Additionally, all the EO did was to delegate the authority of the President to have new silver certificates issued to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary of the Treasury previously had this power, but the law giving that power to the Secretary was repealed by Congress. Here is a link to a complete explanation: http://www.publiceye.org/conspire/flaher... Of course, I am sure you wouldn't want facts to get in the way of your conspiracy theory. Also, United States Notes continued to be issued until 1971 (Kennedy was assassinated in 1963), so U.S. Notes were issued for some time after his death. Even though they are no longer issued, there are still quite a few still in circulation or in collections. The ones in collections are probably not worth more than their face value except as an example of older currency.
Why is Obama still not calling the attack in Bengazi a terrorist attack?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/10/... The video juxtaposes Obama’s claim in the debate against multiple televised statements by White House and Administration officials in subsequent days. It clearly shows that while the president now claims his Rose Garden speech called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror,” neither the White House press office nor Administration officials viewed that speech as an affirmation of terrorism in Benghazi. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice repeatedly referred to the “video” as cause of the attack in subsequent administration statements – with Carney specifically affirming that the White House HAD NOT called the Benghazi attack “terrorism” on September 20.
Did President Obama “misspeak” when he repeatedly claimed, "if you like your health care plan, you can keep it"? Was it a lie? Will there be any political consequences now that it appears to be untrue?
At the moment President Obama made that statement, it was technically the truth - since he was basing that on what his team was proposing. It was not yet law, and Obama was trying to “sell” and also “explain” the proposal.Later, there were those in Congress who insisted that “big insurance” be allowed into the room, before they would ever consider voting for it. These congressmen insisted that Blue Cross, and Cigna, and all of the others be allowed into the negotiations. The major insurance corporations, who already were making the entire health care system in the U.S. such a disaster. [NOTE: I will leave it up to the reader to guess what political party those members of Congress might have belonged to, and remember that some members of Congress take a lot of money in contributions from those “big insurance” corporations.]At the moment Obama made that statement, it was true. He was describing his own plan. Before it was law.After big insurance was allowed to enter into the negotiations, that began to change. And, change. And, change.(The same is true of Obama’s other statement, that he made, where Obama claimed “you can keep your own doctor.”)Once the major insurance providers were allowed in, the ACA was now subject to something that would allow those major corporations to “stay alive,” and “keep their profits rolling in,” and “satisfy their corporate board.” The ACA was diminished, and altered, and changed, and modified.The ACA is flawed. It needs to be be fixed. However, right now, the Republicans will not touch it (since they spent the last six years campaigning on how it was the worst thing since cyanide — a terrible exaggeration.)So, as of today, we are stuck with a very flawed law. It is (honestly) better today, than those days when anyone with a pre-existing condition could not even get health coverage. But, it is far more expensive than it needs to be because “big insurance” is still collecting a huge chunk of everything that happens, every time you go to a doctor, or go the E.R., or visit a hospital, or dare to have a surgery.The rest of the planet has figured this out. The U.S. is the last “advanced” nation on this planet that still does not have the balls to tell the major insurance corporations that they can go fuck themselves.
Did Barack Obama fake his accent during his two terms? People from Hawaii don't talk like that and Obama is from Hawaii.
Did Barack Obama fake his accent during his two terms? People from Hawaii don't talk like that and Obama is from Hawaii.I listened to this NPR show Analyzing Obama's Speech And Cadence, in which a linguist talks about how President Obama speaks. It’s a fascinating show to listen to and explains why he has different styles of speaking.Professor McWhorter, a linguist and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has many interesting to say, but here are a few excerpts from the show.“There were times when he ( President Obama) would do the little hang at the end of sentences or when he would pronounce the word responsibility as "responsibility (pronounced with a black intonation on-air)," which was a black intonation. And it said a lot about our nation that we would get to that point. Black English is becoming a kind of unofficial lingua franca of people under a certain age. If only in how people hear it, whether or not they actually speak it.”“He's a very bidialectal person and most black people are. He is especially good at it, though, in that he can talk in a way where you would not know that he was black over the phone, and that is not true of most black Americans where there are issues of cadence and vowels and coloring where you can tell even if they're using completely standard English in terms of sentence structure. But then, especially when he talks to a black audience, he can sound quite a bit like Reverend Lowery sounded at the inauguration. And so it's a very large and flexible linguistic repertoire.”“And as a linguist, what fascinates me about all these things is that these things tend to be subconscious. It's not that he's walking around thinking, now I'm going to use this dialect. It's about identity and audience. This is the way people speak. It's a fascinating thing.”President Obama knew how to connect with different kinds of audience, with his ability to instinctively adjust the way he spoke.I listened to this show in 2009, and have done so several times since then. I highly recommend others to listen, too. By the way, I’m not even a citizen, and found it very insightful, and I expect American people would really enjoy listening to it.
Why can (commercial) ads make presumably false claims about what President Obama said?
As Charles pointed out the First Amendment does offer protections to free speech, but that doesn't allow you to make false statements about what other people have said, that is slander/libel, depending on whether it is written or spoken. In most cases it is not an issue of criminal law, but it is a civil issue and if you can prove your case you would be granted a judgement for damages from the defamatory claims.There's also an additional concern in cases like these as there are laws regarding using celebrities and public figures in advertising without their permission, even if the ad’s claims about the public figure are true. Here's a great example of that in action: Why You Should Be Careful When Using Celebrities in Your MarketingAds similar to this one are clearly violating both of these areas of law, so the only reason they get away with it is because they fly under the radar.President Obama is obviously a very busy man. He doesn't have time to personally hunt down and sue every bottom-feeding advertiser that uses his name or likeness with a false quote or without permission.In criminal cases even if the victim doesn't want to press charges the state usually has the power to bring charges and try them anyway.That's not true with civil law. The only person who could sue is the injured party, in this case Obama himself. So, as long as the ads aren't run by a big corporation or don't have some serious unintended consequence that makes life harder for President Obama, he's not going to go out of his way to figure out who is running the ads, track them down, serve them with a subpoena, and then take time away from his ridiculously packed schedule running the free world to appear for a never ending string of trials.It's just too petty of an abuse of his name and likeness for him to waste his time on pursuing them, and that's the only reason these advertisers get away with this.