Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Interesting sentence construction.

Posted By: Oh, criminy on 2009-05-28
In Reply to: this is a 'typo', yours is a bad grammar mistakes, get it, or not yet?.. - .-

I would have gone with the adjective ''grammatical'' to modify the noun ''mistakes'' rather than using the noun ''grammar'' to modify another noun, or perhaps ''bad mistakes in grammar.''  Then again,  I might have linked ''bad-grammar'' as a compound modifier, but then that's just me (as well most who are truly English literate.)


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Particularly the construction jobs.
Those often take at least two years of planning, getting bids, getting materials and getting started. Not very helpful right now. I think everyone on the Hill has totally lost any connection with the real world.
Your first sentence says it
It's a question of who is shouldering the burden. Well apparently you're a billionaire,'cause I know many hardworking, responsible, professional middle-class people (no one looking for a handout)working pretty darn hard just to stay afloat...people with degrees who are delivering pizza. Our local food pantries can't keep up with the demand and this was before Katrina. There are Meals on Wheels volunteers, who pay for their own gas, have had to stop because they simply can't afford it. And the meals that WERE being delivered weren't even hot, because THAT was cut back. Go, good for you on your shiny throne passing judgement on who is or isn't looking for a hand-out, but I can tell you that even with every kind of insurance and adequate income, I pray my husband or I don't get sick or have some unforeseen catastrophy, because in many cases that is all it takes.
You said it all in one sentence...
Hindsight IS 20/20, something Democrats tend to forget.  The pre war intelligence was very ominous, and it was international intelligence, not just ours.  If an attack had come our way which was then traced to Iraq, you would have placed the blame squarely on the back of GWB.  Of course, now that we have hindsight, he's blamed for the war being not worth it, wrong war, ad nauseum.  Apply a little logic and you can see that it's a no-win situation.  I believe the man did what he had to do, AT THE TIME.  You can't play Monday morning quarterback.  The prominent Democrats were all on the same page before the war, just read some of their quotes. 
I think the last sentence says it all..sm
Either way, even if you believe McCain's health plan is a train wreck and that none of his math adds up, he proposes to fix that with Medicare savings, not with $882 billion worth of "cuts."

Tell me what the difference is, one says medicare savings and one says medicare cuts. Both mean less money for medicare, no? Semantics on both sides I think.

We can sum all of the above in one sentence:

 


LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!


me neither......Your sentence that
I quoted in my former post reminded me so much of the situation between Israel and the Palestinians, therefore I swerved away from the issue at hand.

Ahmadinejad should step down and give his position to Mousavi. Same with Khatami.
On what are you? In your last sentence
of your post you contradict what you wrote in your subject line!

Hahahaha! LMAO !

You are a joke, 'Backward typist,' are you really .....?

Confused or imbibed?
Your last sentence tells it all
Your last sentence concerning ammo, in my opinion, sums up your beliefs, i.e., republicans, versus democrats.  Everything to you righties is fight time, attack time, war time whereas we lefties post something for people to read or debate, not to fight.  I cant speak for all, but I believe negotiating, talking out problems, trying to understand each other works better than slinging insults, attacks, and using ammo.  A nonpartisian person reading these posts would be able to see, the attacks more often than not are from the right wingers.
I do believe that the last sentence is especially true.
Isn't it amazing.  So many here with ties to Vietnam veterans and so many differing viewpoints.  Nearly every male in my family has served in the Armed Forces and this down to third cousins.  Many of them served in Vietnam.  Every one of them has bad feelings towards the peace movement in the 60s and 70s. 
I will finish your sentence. sm
an impossible thing for YOU.
regarding your list sentence

your body might not be there anymore.


 


is there a subj in that sentence?

just does not make sense.  Please proofread what you post so you don't look illiterate.


 


I just went to the link and the first sentence
states it was from January. I am not even sure he is saying rates will skyrocket, but that will be the argument against his plan to cap greenhouse gases and retrofitting.
Your last sentence of the third paragraph was just as...sm
uncalled for, I believe, and untrue.
ADD time. The end of that sentence should be
shares in the responsibility at this point.
Don't need to explain to you, you explained yourself in your last sentence.
t
Thanks for the post. I was especially impressed by the last sentence...
of the article. At least they showed both sides (good for them), albeit three paragraphs on Palin and 1 line on Obama. Big sentence tho.
Can't ge past the ignorance of the first sentence here.
the constitution is not a static document and is, in fact, a living, dynamic, changing, vital document. To wrap you brain around this concept, consider this. The orignal Constitution contained 10 amendments. Amendments 11 through 27 commenced over time as such: 1795, 1804, 1865, 1868, 1870, 1913x2, 1919, 1920, 1933x2, 1951, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971 and 1992.

There. You see? The (progressive) authors of the constitution in their wisdom provided the mechanism of amendement, that would allow for change and growth. That makes it a living, breathing, dynamic document. Got it?

Next time you try to interpret Obama's book, watch your step.
That last sentence just didn't EVEN sound right! sm
And I think the missing sheep brains is the main thing in this picture.
Did you forget to finish our sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Did you forget to finish your sentence?
Are you psychic? I watched those posts be ignored all day. I realize this is a hot topic in the parallel universe, but back here in the real world, not so much.
Your very first sentence, "Trying to bomb...

... a grassroots political force into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy," reminds me very much of a quote by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, where they're in Cuba trying to "do business" while in the midst of unrest and rebellion of the people. 


Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.
Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?
Michael Corleone: It means they could win.

Although Israel has very sophisticated American-made weapons, maybe, as above, that won't be enough. 


The last sentence is particularly worrisome for Michigan.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804053.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Senate's Health-Care Draft Calls for Most to Buy Insurance, Nixes Obama's 'Public Option'

By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 19, 2009

A draft proposal in the Senate to overhaul the nation's health-care system would require most people to buy health insurance, authorize an expansion of Medicaid coverage and create consumer-owned cooperative plans instead of the government coverage that President Obama is seeking.

The document, distributed among members of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday afternoon, addressed none of the funding questions that have consumed House and Senate negotiators in recent days. But it included an array of coverage provisions that were drastically scaled back from earlier versions, as lawmakers seek to shrink the bill's overall cost. The proposal, for instance, would reduce the pool of middle-class beneficiaries eligible for a new tax credit meant to make insurance more affordable.

The absence of a "public option" marks perhaps the most significant omission. Obama and many Democrats had sought a public option to ensure affordable, universal coverage, but as many as 10 Senate Democrats have protested the idea as unfair to private insurers. In its place, the draft circulated yesterday outlines a co-op approach modeled after rural electricity and telecom providers, subject to government oversight and funded with federal seed money.

Yesterday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) met with four Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the ranking GOP member on the panel, along with two Democratic colleagues in an attempt to find bipartisan consensus. Baucus dubbed the group "the coalition of the willing."

Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.

The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.

Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee charged with developing a financing plan, said lawmakers have not "embraced any particular source of revenue." But he confirmed that big, broad-based taxes like the payroll tax and a value-added tax are under discussion, mainly because they have the potential to raise "a lot of money" for an expansion of health coverage expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.

The House will not unveil a financing plan until after the July 4 recess, Neal said, though House leaders were expected to release an outline of the rest of their plan today, with a goal of putting a bill to vote later this summer. The Senate is aiming to debate its legislation in July as well, and is seeking a bill that would cost less than $1 trillion.

Maintaining that tight schedule could prove difficult, though, because daunting issues remain in both chambers. One area of contention is the extent to which private employers must subsidize public coverage for their workers if the companies don't offer their own plan or if the premiums are unaffordable. The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if lawmakers don't find the right formula, employees may flee their company plans for federal coverage, sending government costs soaring.

The draft in the Senate committee spells out one possible solution: It would require employers to pay 50 percent of Medicaid costs for workers enrolled in the low-income program and 100 percent of the cost of health-insurance tax credits for eligible employees. Workers could forfeit employer coverage only if the cost exceeds 12.5 percent of their income.

The draft, earlier reported on by washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein, spells out four options for requiring employers to provide coverage, with exemptions for firms with up to 200 employees. It would fine individuals who do not purchase coverage, though certain groups, including Native Americans and undocumented workers, would be exempted.

It also would loosen eligibility requirements for Medicaid, a proposal certain to alarm many governors who are grappling with budget crises.





Proves you don't read anything..Says in the 1st sentence he is Gov. Lynch of
x
oops, ignore the last partial sentence....nm

Did you just use the name Rush and the word honesty in the same sentence? (sm)
  • Limbaugh lied about 9-11 Commission report

  • Limbaugh falsely claimed "Nobody ever said there was" a connection between Iraq, 9-11 attacks

  • Limbaugh misrepresented Duelfer report on Iraqi WMDs

  • Limbaugh lied about AIDS

  • Limbaugh overstated the minimum wage

  • Limbaugh made false claims about the Democratic National Convention

  • Limbaugh distorted the Kyoto Protocol

  • Limbaugh falsely accused Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)

  • Limbaugh claimed Clintons are funding Swift Boat Veterans for Truth

  • Limbaugh lied to defend Swift Boat Vets

  • Limbaugh misstated Pew report on journalists

  • Limbaugh mischaracterized the federal deficit

  • Limbaugh misstated federal education spending

  • Limbaugh lied about Bush's false uranium claim

  • And that isn't even the tip of the iceburg for him.  And by the way, what's with the *he owns his problems* junk?  Does that mean that since he admits he's a drug addict then he's not a bad drug addict?  Give me a break.


    http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006


    oops...first sentence posted twice by accident.
    :)
    Haha! I so agree, she summed it up in 1 sentence, there is nothing more to say!..nm
    nm
    That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to
    But that's no surprise. There was one sentence in those two paragraphs about how the crats always blame the pubs, but they never take responsibility and blame the people in their own party who are at fault too. So you take one sentence out of the whole two paragraphs and say that's what the whole message was about. Nice try. My message was about this admistration so far being a disaster in less than one month. The only ones who see it okay are the kool-aid drinkers, and that I'm sick of all the people acting as though there was never a United States until Obama came along. Since you evidently did not read my message I'll repeat it now.

    American has been around for over 200 years. We've had some good presidents and we've had some bad presidents, but Obama did not discover a new country here.

    Since McCain was not elected nobody can say whether or not he would have been a better president or not, so time to put that dog to rest.
    In the last sentence of her post she retracts what she said in her subject line, lol!..nm
    nm
    Your first sentence really shows was a mean hate filled shallow person you are.


    Too bad McCain can't form a sentence w/o gagging, slurring, making faces
    That is his problem. Obama is eloquent... oh well
    interesting, indeed nm
    nm
    This is interesting. SM
    I did hear on the news the person that leaked this story is a former coworker of Roberts named Walter Smith who is somehow associated with "People For the American Way", an anti-Christian hate group.  It's my belief that this was meant to turn the Republicans against Roberts.  Well, big surprise, it didn't work.  They have to be shaking their heads.

    Somewhat interesting.
    AR, posting in a message line that someone is irrational is not the most innocent of maneuvers, so let's not waste too much time congratulating you on your imaginary moral superiority. I sometimes maneuver that way myself but I don't deceive myself into thinking it was anything but honest hostility and I don't act surprised when people respond in kind. So sorry if there was a misunderstanding just in case there was, I'm always willing to give a benefit of a doubt - once or twice. After that you get what you get.

    That said and out of the way, what is it about the rest of Bennett's statement that you believe exonerates the controversial part? I did hear the whole thing and I don't know what you're referring to in that respect.
    Yup, will be interesting,
    Apparently there is a crucial email somewhere that has gone missing and there are some inconsistencies in the testimony. We'll see. I'm sure they'll try to explain it all away.

    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9630676/site/newsweek
    interesting

    From John Stossel's Myths, Lies and Straight Talk  (link at bottom)


    MYTH #8 — Republicans Shrink the Government



    Republicans always trot out the slogan that they oppose big government and want to shrink the federal payroll. President Bush tells us that big government is not the answer.


    President Reagan told us, Our government is too big and it spends too much.


    But for more than 75 years, no Republican administration has cut the size of government. Since George W. Bush became president, government spending has risen nearly 25 percent.


    And the spending increase isn't just tied to the war on terrorism. The Office of Management and Budget says spending at the Environmental Protection Agency is up 12 percent; it's up 14 percent at the Agriculture Department, 30 percent at the Department of the Interior; 64 percent at the Department of Labor, and 70 percent at the Department of Education.


    And the pork keeps pouring out. Even the Peanut Festival in Dothan, Ala., got $200,000.


    Alabama congressman Terry Everett, a Republican, got them the money. He wouldn't talk to us about it, but the locals said they like getting your money. I think it's a waste of money, but if they're going to waste money, I guess it's better to waste it here than anywhere else, one man told me.


    Economist Stephen Moore, a Republican, says, We fought a war against big government and you know what? Big government won.


    He noted, You look at what's happened to the government in the 10 years since the Republicans took control of Congress, the government is twice as big.


    http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123606


    Yes, I saw that too, PK. It will be interesting, no?

    This is interesting...sm

    I heard this a few days ago, but since everyone only pays attention to articles in mainstream papers and TV news, thought I would post it. Could explain why Bush is acting like a brat.  The pressure coming from the families, the public, and the truth movements is getting intense. 


    Apparently, CIA officers are buying legal insurance to cover the cost of their defense should they be indicted by a federal grand jury for their roles in 9/11. They are worried that the results of an internal CIA investigation into some CIA agents’ roles in 9/11 may soon become public and the public outcry would immediately lead to their arrest for murder and conspiracy among other charges.


    CIA officers who are charged with something that was done in the line of duty, i.e., for something that is constitutional and legal; are defended by the largest law firm in the world; the U.S. Justice Department. However, for illegal and unconstitutional charges they are on their own. That is why this private legal insurance has suddenly become so attractive to some employees of the CIA; they know that they will not be defended by the Justice Department because what they did was so illegal and reprehensible. That is why they are busy buying private legal insurance. For a well-researched, excellent article found in the mainstream media see the Washington Post for R. Jeffrey Smith’s story titled, “CIA Officers Buy Legal Insurance”


     


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/10/AR2006091001286.html?nav=hcmodule


    Interesting

    OKay, so based on your analogy.....if someone trespasses on my land with intent to do me harm and I order them off my property and remind them that it is illegal to harm me or to trespass......you imply that I am NOT allowed to mention what the law states and that it is illegal for them to harm me UNLESS I am a law enforcement officer?


    Very interesting view of the world you have. 


    You never stated a time frame for cons ordering liberals off the board, ....you stated it was never done and that suggests an indefinite period of time.  Once again, pretty shoddy logic.


    Interesting
    Guess I shouldn't assume we all learned the same things!! We were always taught that Job was most probably performed as a play and was a teaching piece, not the actual word of G-d.

    It is interesting to hear what others have been taught, within the same faith, as well.
    interesting that everyone behind him on TV
    I don't get that.....why is everyone behind him, around him, in every speech/TV appearance....white?  I see nearly no black people around him EVER....this is what I do not understand. 
    Very interesting!
    Isn't disclosure is a beautiful thing?  and this could be the beginning of the fall for the Bush administration.  Gratifying that people are beginning to speak out about the incompetent Iraqi policy that has been implemented.  However, this film seems to be chronical just a few months of 2003 and wonder why that is. The review from the New York Times was also very interesting.  I encourage anyone to read it.  Doesn't look like it's going to hit too many theaters, so it looks like I will be buying it and loaning it out!
    Yep...some of that is very interesting....
    I would venture a guess that part of the reason poverty has "gone up" is that social programs run amok are starting to erase the middle class, and those who used to be in the "middle class" are now in the "poverty" class...as entitlements extend higher and higher up the income ladder and the "poverty" threshold right along with it. That is why they quote a lot of ballpark statistics and none of the specifics.

    I would also venture a guess that as teen births have gone down, teen abortions have gone up.

    I think you hit the nail on the head with the broad overview comment...but what they never tell you is, as Paul Harvey would put it..."the rest of the story."

    There are usually mitigating factors that go into any statistic. I am not a big fan of ballpark statistics....as you can see.

    :-) Have a great day, piglet!
    I did. Very interesting!

    This was actually the first debate I watched this year.  I wanted to watch the others but just missed them somehow.  I will definitely be watching them from now on!  I found it so interesting, and it really gave me more hope about our country's future.  I just loved hearing so many great ideas for the future of America (from all of the candidates).  I have been very discouraged over the last 7 years.  Things just keep getting worse and worse and worse.  I cannot wait to have a strong, intelligent leader running this country who can help heal our very injured nation!


    I was most impressed with Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton.  I don't know if Richardson has what it takes, but I loved what he had to say about education being the most important thing (I agree!) and just how he presented himself and his ideas in general.  Biden seems to have the experience behind him and a good solid head on his shoulders, and I really appreciated his ability to get right to the point instead of dancing around aimlessly.


    Obama may not have had the strongest night (and I was not happy about how he interrupted Hillary!), but he is my favorite candidate, so I am giving him the benefit of the doubt because I know where he stands on the issues more than I know any other candidate. He just needed to be much more quick and direct with some of his answers, but of course, I still think he's the man. :)  I do fully expect him to learn from his mistakes and completely wow me at the next debate.


    Hillary is a very impressive politician.  I really find her to be extremely intelligent, extremely strong, and very likeable in general.  She would indeed be an incredibly strong leader for this country.  She is a great speaker.  Although people keep talking about how she is being attacked, I do agree with a lot of the critism she receives on her voting record and her alliances (best word I could think of) with major corporations.  That makes me a bit nervous because to me one of the biggest problems in America is that the corporations are using our politicians like their own personal puppets.  However, I am really impressed with her knowledge overall and how she plans to turn this country around, and obviously we would be at least 100 times better off having her in office than Bush and the current sorry excuse for an administration!  January of 2009 cannot come soon enough.


    That's very interesting (sm)
    I am also related to the Bush family and others on that list. I guess it's possible that I am related to Obama as well. I don't know if any of them are/were Muslim, but I am. I love geneaology!
    Wow - quite interesting

    Very interesting articles - and video clips.


    Dick Morris was an advisor to the Bill Clinton administration.  He was also the campaign manager of Clinton's successful 96 re-election.  He knows the Clintons inside and out.  Very interesting reading (and watching).


    http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/


     


    Very interesting
    I'm not a big fan of either candidate, but I definiately have noticed much more info on Obama than McCain this year. What I think is sad about the so-called "Big Media" is that they are supposed to be keeping us informed of what is going on with everything, but they seem to pick and choose what we need to hear. It seems you have to watch several different news programs to get the whole story on what's going on. Of course, if you go back in time, it's always been this way - even in the days of Thomas Jefferson running for President, where people would pay newspapers to print the stories they wanted the public to read. Presidential campaigns have never been pretty and some have been downright nasty- I don't see that changing any time soon, no matter who the favored son may be.
    That is interesting ...

    I'm not trying to bash your opinion just making an observation about how 2 people look at the same thing and see 2 different things.


    You said you felt that Bush did a good job in keeping the country safe after 9/11, etc.  I look at the situation as Bush preying on our fears and using them to invade Iraq.  We did a fast hit on Afghan. which was needed, but then that was it.  Osama bin Laden is still at large (maybe dead for all we really know) and he was behind the whole incident.  But we have torn apart Iraq for what real reason?  Oil.  It can be sugar coated and denied, but we all know that is what it was.  It wasn't for any supposed WMD that he knew were not there.


    I don't think our country can take more war, and that is what McCain has said he believes in (unless he has since changed that statement). 


    I believe Bush has done more hurt than good for this country, our country.  BTW, I am an independent too and will be voting Democrat.


    interesting

    The paragraph above it (not included in chart) states Obama's plan benefits the lowest income brackets while JM's benefits the middle class (if you make $5 million or more per year- joke) or the upper class.  Go to the website and read the paragraph above the chart.


     


    where was this from? interesting...
    nm