Sen Ted Kennedy has died
- Thread starter Vinnie Del Negro
- Start date
Then it must have been made in 1963 since EMK was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1962 and JFK was assassinated in November of 1963.danmand said:
Glad to learn that it wasn't a comment on EMK's morals!
And none of it can be quoted in students papers or it's considered an F. Academics who contribute to it, huh? Any I.P. address, or anonymous name without name, address, phone-number, all of a sudden is Stephan Hawkins. Go ahead, keep using it. A Google hoard search free-bee to screw the economy. Iran uses it too, according to their contribution, there was no Holocaust. Believe that yet? Wikipedia also illegally cybersquats names.Aardvark154 said:LOLCertainly not by the millions of Undergraduates who use it, nor by the many academics who contribute to it.
Write something stupid Aardvark154, nothing new.
Gyaos Baltar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2CI...FB9E2A3D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=52onthebottom said:
When I get older, losing my hair,
Many years from now,
Will you still be sending me a Valentine
Birthday greetings, bottle of wine?
If I'd been out till quarter to three
Would you lock the door?
Will you still need me, will you still feed me,
When I'm sixty-four?
oo oo oo oo oo oo oo oooo
You'll be older too, (ah ah ah ah ah)
And if you say the word,
I could stay with you.
I could be handy, mending a fuse
When your lights have gone
You can knit a sweater by the fireside
Sunday mornings, go for a ride.
Doing the garden, digging the weeds,
Who could ask for more?
Will you still need me, will you still feed me,
When I'm sixty-four?
Every summer we can rent a cottage
In the Isle of Wight, if it's not too dear
We shall scrimp and save
Grandchildren on your knee:
Vera, Chuck, and Dave
Send me a postcard, drop me a line,
Stating point of view
Indicate precisely what you mean to say
Yours sincerely, Wasting Away.
Give me your answer, fill in a form
Mine for evermore
Will you still need me, will you still feed me,
When I'm sixty-four?
Gyaos I’m quite honoured to know that my colleagues and I are "stupid".Gyaos said:
Indeed some of what is posted on Wikipedia is garbage, however, much more is entirely acurate. Any student using Wikipedia or any such source for purposes of writing a paper should without fail double check their facts, however, for gaining general knowledge, getting ideas for areas of further independent research including saying hmm I should read the article or book mentioned here in the endnotes, I see no harm at all.
For instance although I'm sure I might perhaps quible about some fine points please tell me where the following articles are so shockingly inacurate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Freeman
As was mentioned at the time of his divorce, altogether too sad.danmand said:
But definitely a witty comment on your part Danmand
Lets see: Just four off the top of my head:train said:
1) Cheated and dismissed from Harvard. (Has dear old Dad call in chits and is readmitted and then goes on to Harvard Law School - how many of the rest of us would be able to pull that off - so much for that requirement of good moral character).
2) Gets off with a two month totally suspended sentence for what for anyone else (probably even the Governor of Massachusetts) would have resulted in being charged with manslaughter, a drunk driving charge, leaving the scene of a personal injury collision, and failure to report a personal injury collision. With probably ten years imprisonment.
3) Did a spectacular job of wreaking the U.S. immigration system (the Immigration Act of 1965) and no news anchor ever bothered to quote back to him his many false promises as to the benefits that would accrue. Let alone his subsequent support for amnesty for illegal immigrants.
4) His blatant hypocrisy in pressuring and personally asking for the Massachusetts Legislature to eliminate the power of the Governor of Massachusetts to appoint someone to a vacant Senate seat when he thought that Governor Romney was going to have such an opportunity and then a few years later campaigning like crazy to have that reversed when there was a Democratic Governor in Massachusetts - I doubt there is an other state in the Union where anyone would attempt to try to pull that one off!
Joe tended to kick Joe, Jr. and Jack and to a certain extent Bobby a lot more than he did Teddy.JohnFK said:
Ironically (although Teddy was a bit too young to really have responsibility) but the only one of Kathleen's siblings who had the guts to stand up to their parents for her was Joe. JFK was a total yes man even writing nasty letters.
Gotta love honesty in the face of pressure to show "respect for the dead" also known as lying about your opinions of a person, I respect that a great deal.Aardvark154 said:
The Kennedy's are interesting because while there are many families that have power in America, they are the only ones that appear to embrace the label of American royalty.
As for Ted he lived a long privileged life and made quite an impact on the world, can't say he didn't make the most of things.
For the vast majority of us to bray at the moral shortcomings of others on a board dedicated to chasing Hos is a bit much. I am not a liberal, they are too conservtive for me but this man did more for health care and education over the decades than any other public official in the entire nation. He made mistakes including political mistakes but we are all complex bundles of our angels and our demons. Booze and chasing women aren't so bad are they.
I spent my money on wine, women and song-the rest I squandered foolishly.
I spent my money on wine, women and song-the rest I squandered foolishly.
You're supporting "wikipedic" ideas that wish for all copyrights to end. A company like Wikipedia is very dangerous and anything inaccurate, that can be misconstrued as accurate at anytime, has NO PLACE. Period. They have created the environment for inaccuracy, and the belief for inaccurate information to be true.Aardvark154 said:
I'm not going into any examples, but there are large bases of people that believe certain laws and regulations listed on that site (by pieces of shit), are sound, when in fact they are all wrong based on actual legal documents that exist in paper form, or the law itself.
That's why we have encyclopedias that people actually PAY FOR. Not shit in which any cock-sucker from anywhere in the world, anonymously puts up their ideas, even ideas of slander that are misplaced. Some slander exists and the person being slandered never know it. IT'S DANGEROUS. Additionally, the information is cloned by spiders to ask.com and other pieces of shit websites on the Internet. So if slander gets cloned, listed by one f'n anonymous cock-sucker, it's not good now, wouldn't you say...
Academia does not allow the use of Wikipedia. Period. Students can't use it. If they do, they risk expulsion. End of line on this subject.
Gyaos Baltar.
You would be correct if you said most institutions do not allow students to cite Wikipedia, as you know utterly different from their not using it or folks in the Academy not posting on it.Gyaos said:
I would agree, but that is a problem of anonmous posting in general.Gyaos said:
As I previously posted there is plenty of accurate infomation available on Wikipedia, however, like much else caveat emptor applies.
