Started By
Message

re: Is anyone going to watch King Barack I's decree tonight?

Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:10 am to
Posted by FT
REDACTED
Member since Oct 2003
26925 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:10 am to
I'll be watching. He's only got two years left. It's like football season; you have to make time to see every minute.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35507 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:12 am to
quote:

No difference at all. We're talking about comprehension here. Comprehending is trying to figure out what the "unsaid" part of the said is actually saying.
Buy yourself a dictionary. Reading comprehension is understanding what is written. Seeing something that isn't there is
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54254 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:12 am to
quote:

Zach is watching Kansas State vs. West Virginia.


Thanks for the heads up.
Posted by sugar71
NOLA
Member since Jun 2012
9967 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:13 am to
quote:

its not odd at all, presidential speeches get dumped all the time in favor of retarded sitcoms.





Especially since this is sweeps week I believe & the networks have major money invested in their big rated shows & many of them are season Finales.

Its only supposed to be a 10 or 15 minute speech anyway.
Posted by UncleFestersLegs
Member since Nov 2010
11057 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:15 am to
quote:

He was obviously trying to use legalese so he wouldn't be lying in his own mind. He had a pause between "that woman" and "Monica Lewinsky" as if they were two different statements. Or at least that is my guess as to how he played it out.

He said "that woman" then quickly realized how it sounded and added her name.
Posted by Hawkeye95
Member since Dec 2013
20293 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:15 am to
quote:

On a grand scale of immigration? Don't think so Hawk.

Well I dunno about that, but speeches from the whitehouse are often ignored. If he did it in front of congress, I bet it would be aired.

Obama is always late on these speeches and this is prime advertising time. Plus the people that GAF can watch elsewhere.
quote:

Something as controversial as to how Obama is implementing this is not news worthy? There is an ulterior motive here by the big 3.

Fox is also electing not to cover it fwiw.

But I think its a sad state of affairs when this stuff isn't covered. I remember the first time I saw it happen with Clinton.
Posted by UncleFestersLegs
Member since Nov 2010
11057 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:20 am to
quote:

But I think its a sad state of affairs when this stuff isn't covered. I remember the first time I saw it happen with Clinton.

I think it's great. If you want to watch it, go to a relevant cable channel that eats this shite up. Most of them will have it. Interrupting network tv is silly.
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54254 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:20 am to
quote:

Reading comprehension is understanding what is written.


Comprehension is like opinions. You and I both can read the same thing and comprehend it two different ways. Unless an actual fact is presented then who is to say whose comprehension is right? Does comprehension not mean "what did you just get out of what you just read?" We won't all comprehend the same exact thing.
Posted by La Place Mike
West Florida Republic
Member since Jan 2004
28896 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:29 am to
quote:

It'll be difficult for Republicans to reject executive action on immigration and not to be seen as anti-immigrant and anti-Latino.
I guess
2/3rds of the American public is seen as anti-Latino
Posted by double d
Amarillo by morning
Member since Jun 2004
16485 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:29 am to
quote:

JORGE RAMOS ? @jorgeramosnews
Follow
It'll be difficult for Republicans to reject executive action on immigration and not to be seen as anti-immigrant and anti-Latino.


No George, they'll be seen as Pro AMERICAN!
Posted by SquirrelyBama
Member since Nov 2011
6389 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:54 am to
quote:

I find it sickening that the white house requested they not air it.


Link?
Is this really true?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
99657 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 10:59 am to
quote:

JORGE RAMOS


That's the illegal reporter, right? Or, was that Vargas?

Regardless, in response to the OP, frick no. Have no desire to watch that POS wipe his arse on the Constitution.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35507 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

Comprehension is like opinions. You and I both can read the same thing and comprehend it two different ways. Unless an actual fact is presented then who is to say whose comprehension is right? Does comprehension not mean "what did you just get out of what you just read?" We won't all comprehend the same exact thing.
Seriously? No. That is a completely wrong definition of comprehension. The closest words that you are looking for are inference or conjecture.
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35507 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 12:05 pm to
quote:

He said "that woman" then quickly realized how it sounded and added her name.
I was guessing that he was loosely pointing to a woman in the crowd when he said "that woman". Kind of a technique of saying the truth but in a deceptive way, as in "I did not sleep with that woman I am pointing to". That way the liar doesn't trip over their own words. Either way it was a lie when all was said and done.

Personally i would think that Kenneth Starr is total scum for even asking the question when the answer isn't relative to anything he was investigating.
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
80324 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 1:02 pm to
quote:

Personally i would think that Kenneth Starr is total scum for even asking the question when the answer isn't relative to anything he was investigating.


Ken Starr was a prosecutor. Prosecutors establish patterns. It was completely relevant to what he was investigating.
Posted by Keltic Tiger
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2006
19449 posts
Posted on 11/20/14 at 1:06 pm to
What's going to be interesting is when the new Congress asks The Emperor's new Atty General for her legal opinion on the his right to sign this EO. She supposedly has no strong, overt ties to the Emperor, one reason she's supposed to get an easy confirmation. As for Fox, my future wife, Megyan Kelly, will have an extensive breakdown of this EO, with experts on both sides evaluating it on her show at 8:00 pm.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram