I drove by their office a few weeks ago. All the employees were out on the deck at lunch. They were staring around, mindlessly. Not much hope for that company.
You've succeeded at a lot of things, and probably don't need any more money. What motivates you to wake up every morning, and get out to work? What keeps you going? What really makes you happy (or what really puts a smile on your face)?
If you go to beaches on the north shore of Hawaii, which is on the edge of the patch, you get little pieces of plastic washing up on the beach all the time. It's annoying.
Alternately: while being polite for the week with the camera on, he realized there is a better way to interact with people, and it gets better results.
I doubt many police like getting tons of complaints, so he was happier when his complaint count went down.
You have the Republican candidate attacking veterans for being captured, attacking the families of fallen veterans, and attacking veterans who suffer from PTSD, just to name a few things Trump has done.
If this were any other candidate who ran for the nomination this year, not only would they never have said these attacks, they would have torpedoed their candidacy by doing so.
My point was, that knowing how to handle these sorts of problems without it torpedoing your campaign is a crucial skill for modern presidential candidates. The Clintons maybe mastered it first (and watching them is like watching a great artist at work), but Trump is good at it, too.
For the record, I consider both major party candidates to be terrible. But Trump is getting away with all kinds of things that would sink any other candidate
Both candidates do. That's why they are still in the race. A crucial skill in a world where negative ads are so common.
For me, it's a protest vote because if he actually had a chance of winning, I wouldn't vote for him. The other two candidates both at least know enough about the world to name a current leader of a foreign country, unlike Gary Johnson.
Looks like it went through: "Mr. Combetta is one of at least two people who were given immunity by the Justice Department as part of the investigation." The NYT usually gets their facts right.
It doesn't work. As soon as you stop eating, your metabolism drops like crazy, in some cases daily calorie requirements have been seen to drop to 800 C/day. Thus you never lose as much as you want to. Really annoying, but also good for me when I was a starving college student.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't realize how weird their laboratories are!
I drove by their office a few weeks ago. All the employees were out on the deck at lunch. They were staring around, mindlessly. Not much hope for that company.
I love that you've been modded informative.
tbh inside wire is not too hard to fix yourself, too. It's not high-voltage or anything.
Have you tried a letter from a lawyer?
Do you know how to program? What is your favorite language?
What is the ethical system that guides you?
Go to Southend pier on the SE coast of the UK (i.e. the wrong side for any kind of Great Pacific Garbage Patch). The same happens.
England is right next to the North Atlantic gyre. Notably, it doesn't happen on California beaches.
I see what you're saying.
You've succeeded at a lot of things, and probably don't need any more money. What motivates you to wake up every morning, and get out to work? What keeps you going? What really makes you happy (or what really puts a smile on your face)?
And if you've been following the news, you know that Guccifer2's "leak" has been debunked.
Really? Because that seems more important than most of the stuff mentioned in the summary.
If you go to beaches on the north shore of Hawaii, which is on the edge of the patch, you get little pieces of plastic washing up on the beach all the time. It's annoying.
So yeah, there is evidence, I've seen it.
its obviously ludicrous to suggest she could not promote her own charity!
Using your time as secretary of state to promote your own charity isn't really good optically.
Alternately: while being polite for the week with the camera on, he realized there is a better way to interact with people, and it gets better results.
I doubt many police like getting tons of complaints, so he was happier when his complaint count went down.
You have the Republican candidate attacking veterans for being captured, attacking the families of fallen veterans, and attacking veterans who suffer from PTSD, just to name a few things Trump has done. If this were any other candidate who ran for the nomination this year, not only would they never have said these attacks, they would have torpedoed their candidacy by doing so.
My point was, that knowing how to handle these sorts of problems without it torpedoing your campaign is a crucial skill for modern presidential candidates. The Clintons maybe mastered it first (and watching them is like watching a great artist at work), but Trump is good at it, too.
For the record, I consider both major party candidates to be terrible. But Trump is getting away with all kinds of things that would sink any other candidate
Both candidates do. That's why they are still in the race. A crucial skill in a world where negative ads are so common.
Doc files, I can see some merit in providing two dumps, one with any autoplay macros neutered
Doesn't Microsoft already stop macros from playing without warning in documents downloaded from the internet?
For me, it's a protest vote because if he actually had a chance of winning, I wouldn't vote for him. The other two candidates both at least know enough about the world to name a current leader of a foreign country, unlike Gary Johnson.
I admire the try, but that story turned political immediately with systemd arguments.
As long as most people vote based on the party name, there will always be corruption.
I don't think the deal ever went through.
Looks like it went through: "Mr. Combetta is one of at least two people who were given immunity by the Justice Department as part of the investigation." The NYT usually gets their facts right.
And the quality of medical code isn't very good, still.......
Weird/sad thing is the dearth of positive articles for either candidate.
The one weird trick: don't eat anything.
It doesn't work. As soon as you stop eating, your metabolism drops like crazy, in some cases daily calorie requirements have been seen to drop to 800 C/day. Thus you never lose as much as you want to. Really annoying, but also good for me when I was a starving college student.
As opposed to who Trump would name to the Supreme Court.
What don't you like about his picks? Serious question.