Oboma .. another term

49er wrote:

deltadave wrote:

ems wrote:

deltadave wrote:

Thetoolman wrote:Oboma...

"When people can't even spell their own President's name, that is the end of civilization."
-Leon Trotsky

I'm sure the "misspelling" of our President's name was purposely done ~ wouldn't you agree?

No.

LOL as I think you win the award for the shortest post.

49er

Thanks, but that award clearly would go to The Dot People.

Goofproof wrote:

JeffL wrote:

RWinkelman wrote:
True story - being served at a restuaruant my waitress brought up Being so happy about Obama winning. After a few rounds of drinks and a meal and my rebuttle she brought the bill... $40... I asked her to take a moment and follow me as I was paying the bill. I stood at the bar next to a total stranger, I looked at the waitress and gave her exactly $40 - I took $10 out and said to this stranger as I tapped him on the shoulder "Sir, Here is ten dollars, I know you did nothing to earn it but this waitress did - please accept it as redistribution - she worked for you it you earn it"

And I walked out to cheers.... and one jaw dropped.. hers..

Love the story and I got the point of if it, but maybe because I'm just tired, I can't figure out what you actually meant to type, where it says "she worked for you, it you earn it". What should that say?

He is talking to the man he gave her $10 too,to make life fair for the world.

I really don't mean to pick on you (seriously, I'm the king of typos ), but the way you wrote that had me confused for a few seconds too.
You typed the wrong "too". You should have typed "to", because "too" means "also". I thought, that you thought, he gave them both $10.
That said, I often make the same typo myself
Few people (including me) would actually state it correctly, not ending the phrase with a preposition, and write, "He is talking to the man to whom he gave her $10". Even that sounds a little off. How about, "He is talking to the man to whom he had given her $10 tip"? Yes! That's the ticket!

As I said I understand the moral of the story, it's just those last few words. In the same sentence, he said to the man, "you did nothing to earn it", so "you earn it" makes no sense, no matter how I try to figure out what he meant to type. I'd just like to know the correct ending in case I want to repeat it

JeffL wrote:

Goofproof wrote:

JeffL wrote:

RWinkelman wrote:
True story - being served at a restuaruant my waitress brought up Being so happy about Obama winning. After a few rounds of drinks and a meal and my rebuttle she brought the bill... $40... I asked her to take a moment and follow me as I was paying the bill. I stood at the bar next to a total stranger, I looked at the waitress and gave her exactly $40 - I took $10 out and said to this stranger as I tapped him on the shoulder "Sir, Here is ten dollars, I know you did nothing to earn it but this waitress did - please accept it as redistribution - she worked for you it you earn it"

And I walked out to cheers.... and one jaw dropped.. hers..

Love the story and I got the point of if it, but maybe because I'm just tired, I can't figure out what you actually meant to type, where it says "she worked for you, it you earn it". What should that say?

He is talking to the man he gave her $10 too,to make life fair for the world.

I really don't mean to pick on you (seriously, I'm the king of typos ), but the way you wrote that had me confused for a few seconds too.
You typed the wrong "too". You should have typed "to", because "too" means "also". I thought, that you thought, he gave them both $10.
That said, I often make the same typo myself
Few people (including me) would actually state it correctly, not ending the phrase with a preposition, and write, "He is talking to the man to whom he gave her $10". Even that sounds a little off. How about, "He is talking to the man to whom he had given her $10 tip"? Yes! That's the ticket!

As I said I understand the moral of the story, it's just those last few words. In the same sentence, he said to the man, "you did nothing to earn it", so "you earn it" makes no sense, no matter how I try to figure out what he meant to type. I'd just like to know the correct ending in case I want to repeat it

It's a story that has a true outcome. As the night wears on my english and spelling suffer, the above post was at 2:30 am, while I can't use that as an excuse in the end. Spelling and english was never my best subjects, and I find the spellcheck on the forum to be almost useless, so I don't try anymore.

The bad thing is the lesson, is lost on 51% of the voting population, that was just proven. Jim

JeffL wrote:
Few people (including me) would actually state it correctly, not ending the phrase with a preposition, and write, "He is talking to the man to whom he gave her $10".

The myth that won't die!

It is proper to end a sentence with a preposition.

Here is a link, http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/end ... epositions , you can properly go to.

Propositions are a lot more fun!

chunkyfrog wrote:Propositions are a lot more fun!

It's been a very long time since anyone made one me to.

Goofproof wrote:

JeffL wrote:

Goofproof wrote:

JeffL wrote:

RWinkelman wrote:
True story - being served at a restuaruant my waitress brought up Being so happy about Obama winning. After a few rounds of drinks and a meal and my rebuttle she brought the bill... $40... I asked her to take a moment and follow me as I was paying the bill. I stood at the bar next to a total stranger, I looked at the waitress and gave her exactly $40 - I took $10 out and said to this stranger as I tapped him on the shoulder "Sir, Here is ten dollars, I know you did nothing to earn it but this waitress did - please accept it as redistribution - she worked for you it you earn it"

And I walked out to cheers.... and one jaw dropped.. hers..

Love the story and I got the point of if it, but maybe because I'm just tired, I can't figure out what you actually meant to type, where it says "she worked for you, it you earn it". What should that say?

He is talking to the man he gave her $10 too,to make life fair for the world.

I really don't mean to pick on you (seriously, I'm the king of typos ), but the way you wrote that had me confused for a few seconds too.
You typed the wrong "too". You should have typed "to", because "too" means "also". I thought, that you thought, he gave them both $10.
That said, I often make the same typo myself
Few people (including me) would actually state it correctly, not ending the phrase with a preposition, and write, "He is talking to the man to whom he gave her $10". Even that sounds a little off. How about, "He is talking to the man to whom he had given her $10 tip"? Yes! That's the ticket!

As I said I understand the moral of the story, it's just those last few words. In the same sentence, he said to the man, "you did nothing to earn it", so "you earn it" makes no sense, no matter how I try to figure out what he meant to type. I'd just like to know the correct ending in case I want to repeat it

It's a story that has a true outcome. As the night wears on my english and spelling suffer, the above post was at 2:30 am, while I can't use that as an excuse in the end. Spelling and english was never my best subjects, and I find the spellcheck on the forum to be almost useless, so I don't try anymore.

The bad thing is the lesson, is lost on 51% of the voting population, that was just proven. Jim

Agreed! No one should get something for nothing or even worse, criminal behavior. As evidenced by this election, I think people are starting to get wise to it.

ChicagoGranny wrote:

JeffL wrote:
Few people (including me) would actually state it correctly, not ending the phrase with a preposition, and write, "He is talking to the man to whom he gave her $10".

The myth that won't die!

It is proper to end a sentence with a preposition.

Here is a link, http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/end ... epositions , you can properly go to.

You are right! This definitely goes into my "you learn something new everyday" category
Thank you for informing me

opticalpopsicle wrote: Agreed! No one should get something for nothing...

So you don't believe in welfare programs? Hmmmm...

I often use a preposition to end a sentence with.

Opticalpopsical - i couldn't agree with you more - i get a kick out of all the right wing republicans wanting to move to canada/australia/costa rica or Israel to escape our "leftist, socialist" government. Obviously they've never lived there or outside the USA - all of those countries offer health care for all as a basic human right and a far more extensive social safety net than does the USA. There really is no major party anywhere in the world that is anything like the US republican party. The US democratic party is to the RIGHT of most right wing parties among the major democracies - which all support universal access to health care and higher education. The irony is that republicans should look to Putin in Russia or the Chinese communist party for a role model of the kind of society that they are advocating - oligarchies with little to non-existent social safety nets where everyone is basically on their own.

A safety net is one thing, a hammock is quite another.

If I understand the current tax code correctly, Paris Hilton pays less tax on her trust fund income than I do on my earned income. I work hard for my salary. Paris Hilton paying less than I do seems wrong to me.

I suspect you mean she pays a lower RATE than you. Big difference!

eeckel wrote:If I understand the current tax code correctly, Paris Hilton pays less tax on her trust fund income than I do on my earned income. I work hard for my salary. Paris Hilton paying less than I do seems wrong to me.

I agree with that.

However, note that Democrats controlled the Senate/House/Presidency for two years and controlled the Senate/Presidency for four years and not only did they not do anything about our horrible tax code, they did not want to do anything.

The Democrats were perfectly satisfied to leave our tax code as it is and only bring it up as a campaign issue. Watch 2016 roll around and there will have been placed some "bandaids" on our tax code but it will still be a horrible patchwork of bad legislation.