Work from a printed copy; it’s easier on the eyes
I like to write on paper first and then type it out when it's ready. On paper I can add thoughts that I left out and move things around here and there.
Work from a printed copy; it’s easier on the eyes
I like to write on paper first and then type it out when it's ready. On paper I can add thoughts that I left out and move things around here and there.
Another tip is to read the paper out loud. That’s one way to see how well things flow.
I definitely agree with this revising tip. I also have others read it as well for word flow.
And then, sadly, sometimes revision does mean trashing your first draft and starting from scratch.
This is something that could happen after you keep reading it too much and second guessing yourself, as many people do. It's really just human nature to do so.
Check the focus of the paper: Is it appropriate to the assignment? Is the topic too big or too narrow? Do you stay on track through the entire paper?
This is an important issue that I feel like I am struggling with. It's hard to not over write when you want something to be good or the message to be conveyed.
reinventing one self allows for you to learn new things about yourself and not staying stagnant in life
We are each other's business says to me that we are our brother's keeper. We can help those who can not help themselves by becoming a great support system no matter what the situation. MY business is the business of helping and knowing what is going on with someone who is in need.
Her livelihood is based off of her being semi-permanent (independent) and not permanent (dependent). This allowed her to be able to move out and learn new things about herself as she took the challenge that awaited her in the "Big Bads of the world."
"I believe in inner strength" This young lady found it within herself to write about her stepmother, the woman that loved her father and had the will to take care and love her father until his dying day. The strength that it took or her to get through each day had to be hard. She was upset with her at first but deep down inside she appreciated her and she is right it takes inner strength to be able to act as if nothing is different. It seem like they actually formed a lasting relationship because of the love that Janey had for her dying father.
Shopping at Chevron, heck my mom will shop wherever the best prices are with great quality of food. He should not be embarrassed but it was the way people looked at them and not the actual shopping but the experience of it.
":belief in flexibility" allows this writer to understand that his mother was doing what she needed to do in order to make sure they survived. Survival has a lot to do with being flexible
the cliche' "tomorrow will be a better day" in this instance is appropriate due to the milestones that were reached by her grandfather and father at the age of 16 for both of them. Although dad fears what the world has in store for his daughter, she reminds him that the there will be a better tomorrow as it was for them and will also be for her and to not be fearful.
"a problem can look like a mess" he is referring to his dyslexia and having to overcome it by way of the Rubik's cube.
"But I'll know that in 20-26 washes", I feel like she is using the washes as a metaphor for years.
"Semi-permanent hair dye is about finding security within unlimited freedom" This means that nothing is permanent and is instead forever changing. She is not bound by any one thing.
It also has a marketing element as it could allow them to sell more diet drinks.
Right this is really more of a selling push than it is a lowering of calories in beverages. They are trying to get you to buy the lower caloric drinks along side the regular beverages that they are already advertising. More $$$ being spent to the beverage industry.
so through smaller packages and by encouraging people to drink diet sodas, water and other other beverages that have fewer calories than a standard soft drink.
Smaller will probably mean more sugar in the cans or bottles. Which to me, also means more calories than not.
While the beverage companies have branched into some of these areas, they are not eager to see the drop in traditional sodas continue. For that reason, their latest anti-obesity campaign doesn't have much fizz.
Interesting point. I too feel as though this campaign will not have any fizz also.
The problem is that diet sodas aren't necessarily an improvement. Studies on the effect of diet soft drinks are mixed, but many suggest — surprisingly — that they are no better for reducing obesity than sugary drinks and are, in some ways, worse.
I agree that diet drinks are worse. Diet drinks have that sweetener that is actually way more sweet than natural sugar. I believe it's called aspartame. This can cause weight gain and is bad for the body. It has given me a headache too. I've only drank it a couple of times and it was just not good at all.
Americans have been trending toward bottled water and other non-sugary drinks for reasons of health and taste over the past decade
I have found this to be true. People are more apt to buy water more now than ever. With the ne wave of flavored water, people tend to enjoy that more and spend money on it as well.
A vital new push to cut calories:
Very optimistic approach but will take more than just caloric value of beverages that needs to be cut. People's mindset need to be changed as well.
History proves that when the beverage industry comes to the table, there are powerful results.
This heading is confusing. These are things that they would like to set forth and do but it doesn't mean that beverage calories have been reduced ass of now. There is a goal but it has not been reached
Alliance School Beverage Guidelines that led to a 90% reduction of beverage calories in schools.
I also think that schools turning off their vending machines after a certain hour at schools can cut down on intake. The consumption of sugary beverages can be controlled this way. This promotes more of a health variety as they put more waters in the machine than they have ever had. It gives students more options than just pop/soda.
distribution strengths to promote smaller-portion sizes, water, and no- and lower-calorie beverage options.
As mentioned before, the no or low calorie drinks are not beneficial to people because like taste and honestly these do not taste very well to most. Smaller portions may actually work because people still get the taste that they were originally looking for when making the purchase.
no-calorie beverages are declining. So there are headwinds stalling future calorie reduction
These are declining as far as purchase rate due to the taste of these products. People due not like the artificial taste of these no calorie beverages. It is a waste of money when the taste is not enjoyable which is why you buy it in the first place.
a river of birds, a grand black current winding through the heavens.
I think that this shows how the child feels at this moment. Saddened with a heavy heart.
birds flew high above the pasture, weaving and turning. “It’s like God writing on the sky,” he said, “it’s like the signature of God.”
This sounds like cursive writing in the sky. God is using the birds to write his feelings in the sky for all to see. Like when it rains at funerals, I like to say that God is mourning with us.
then continued to look at it for a long time. She pointed at the toe of my boot and said, “Whose head is that? Is it a baby’s
Does mom have Dementia? it never tells us why mom is in the hospital
throwing darkness over me
This sounds like she is saying that the sky was covered with birds so thick that the sun was blocked causing sadness
I am wondering what was wrong with mom? Did she have Dementia?
How could our hearts be large enough for heaven if they are not large enough for earth?
How can you be so open to the many splendored things that Heaven has in store for you when you don't care enough about the land that God has given you breathe fresh air from and land that he has given you to live on now as the earth itself is a splendor thing of beauty.
He did not care for pewter or silver or gold, but he cherished wood.
His dad was a simple man. Shiny, flashy things did not intrigue him.
My father never paid much heed to pain. Near the end, when his worn knee often slipped out of joint, he would pound it back in place with a rubber mallet. If a splinter worked into his flesh beyond the reach of tweezers, he would heat the blade of his knife over a cigarette lighter and slice through the skin
Father was tough as nails. He did not let pain get him down, he kept pushing on no matter what.
The founder Joanne Martin knew what she was doing when she made the museum. Although harsh for children she wanted them to see the importance of why things happened to the early Blacks of America.
The visualization of what she is describing is very challenging. As I being a black male am having a hard time listening but yet am very engaged in what she is saying about the slave ship the visitors to this museum will get a chance to actually stand in. Stating that "Slaves are coming aboard the ship" when most people who visit this museum are black is very disturbing. This Persuasive speaking grabs your attention quickly.
This form of speaking is a chronological way of telling a story. She uses great meaning of words to tell about the first thing you see when you walking into the museum and how alarming it is to see it.
She did not put together the whole truth, that he'd been stealing from her for over a year, that he was the identity thief, not some stranger in a dingy apartment in Chicago. He was the identity thief who made her so totally stressed out over money all the time, who drove her to the point where she was looking over her shoulder as she walked to her own post office box.
This whole story and the way she felt about it shows the cause and effect of this situation. It was all over not really knowing the guy that she had been dealing with for about 3-4 years now.
Bum-bum-bum. It was the boyfriend. After all, think about it. Who else could it be? In retrospect, Rachel says that she is sure there was some small part of her in the back of her brain which was like, OK, what if it's him?
Effect: it was her boyfriend who actually was stealing from here the whole time but the good in him put the blinders on.
Until she and her boyfriend decide they're going to move and she needs the $1,000. And she goes to the top dresser drawer, where she keeps all of her financial stuff, the receipts and statements and all of that, and there's no check.
Cause : she needs the money to move and can't find the stash that she put up where only she could find it. Red flags but don't want to believe it could be her boyfriend.
So eventually, she just gives up on the entire banking system. She closes her last account, has the bank put all of the money that was remaining, $1,000, into a bank check that she keeps in a drawer, handles all of her finances in cash and money orders. Problem solved at last.
She decided to trust herself and this way no one can continue to steal from her. Effect of the prior above statement.
I started to become just a very paranoid person all the time. After this had been happening for a year or two, I was just very anxious all the time.
Cause: she became very paranoid and untrusting of people as she just knew it was the guy that she brushed shoulders with. Whole life turned upside down.
So she goes and closes out her bank account, switches to a different bank. Same thing happens. Money just starts disappearing. And she goes through several banks this way.
The effect of the scenario is to close her accounts to try to stop money from disappearing out of her accounts. Does not work however, as the person is able to still withdraw funds from all institutions that she has banked with.
And at one point, he just brushed against me, and I had my purse actually hanging over the chair. And it wasn't until after he had left and I went to pay that I realized that my wallet was gone.
This shows the cause and effect type of speech. She is establishing what happened that caused all of this to happen.
Starnes and his ideological brethren have continued to thrive in Obama's America - not despite, but because of, a president and a set of ideas they hysterically denounce as grave threats to the American way of life.
This states that because Obama felt that everyone had the right to express their first amendment it allows for people such as Starnes and his left wing way of thinking to be able to speak aloud about their beliefs without any backlash.
"Hitler was not a big fan of the Baby Jesus," Starnes writes in a chapter titled "Nazis, Communists, and the USA." "Neither were the Communists. And apparently some American employees and schoolteachers share an equal disdain for the little Lord Jesus." Starnes is just saying.
He should never compare anyone to Hitler! He is saying that people should not have the right to practice another faith. Hitler ruled against Judaism and because of it we had the Holocaust. No where did Obama suggest that one faith is the ultimate faith. Taking Religion out of the schools just made it so no one particular person could push their religion onto another person. Especially with children as they have no choice but to participate as they are children and abiding by school rules.
Starnes also lambastes the president for stating that we're "not just a Christian nation," but also a nation of Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and secularists.
He is trying to say that Obama is making light of Catholicism. He actually is just saying that we are a melting-pot full of different religions and everyone should be able to practice the one that they choose.
Portraying himself as a down-home Southerner who loves sweet tea (a fact he reminds readers of no fewer than nine times), Duck Dynasty, guns, and his hardline Southern Baptist faith, beneath Starnes' folksy veneer is a far more venomous culture warrior.
He is trying to appeal to the down-home Southerner in the hopes that he/she will understand his religious stand. I personally would be nervous of someone who feels that they have to project themselves to say "hey I am just ike you" in order for them to like you and your stance.
During his publicity tour for God Less America, Starnes has homed in on a consistent message: religious, specifically Christian, values are under attack, largely thanks to an all-out assault allegedly led by the Obama administration, aided and abetted by LGBT activists and advocates for secularists and adherents to minority faiths. Obama, Starnes asserts, is at the forefront of a conspiracy "to eradicate the Christian faith" from the public square.
He states that the constitution is being undermined because we are accepting of LGBT marriages and not just man and woman marriages. He blames this on Obama but in all actuality this was something that would be in place eventually anyway. This is another form of forcing a certain religion and its prophecies on the rest of America. Just because that is how you live your life does not meant every one has to abide by the Catholic religion. He states those who do not follow Catholicism are secular people who really are just people who oppose his way of thinking.
The principal framers of the American political system wanted no religious parties in national politics. They crafted a constitutional order that intended to make a person's religious convictions, or his lack of religious convictions, irrelevant in judging the value of his political opinion or in assessing his qualifications to hold political office.
the fact that the founding fathers had this thought process in mind was a good one because they could vote for who they thought would do the job correctly and not based on your religious morals. Today's government is the opposite. It used to be him vs. me, now people are voted into office based on if they are liberals or conservatives, if they are religious people, and unfortunately by their gender and their race. All things that do not show who the better candidate is.
Many religious people keep their opinions to themselves and don't proselytize. That policy isn't the prescription here. American society especially invites a religious perspective in public debate.
I agree with this comment as I believe that most religions love to debate publicly to pull on the coat tails of people to see what they are feeling and how they are living their lives. I've opened the door to Jehovah's Witness members and the whole time they try to get me tell them about my faith and how their beliefs are much better than mine and then try to convert me while they are standing on my porch. Public debate every single time.
Some of the founding fathers fretted that Americans weren't much interested in religion and most definitely weren't securely Christian
I don't think that he is saying that they are not interested as much as he is saying that Catholicism although more prevalently seen due to the English bringing it ashore, not many of them actually practiced it. This to me is that religion was not that big of deal then and should not be that big of a deal now and should not be incorporated into affairs of politics today.
Tocqueville's reasoning was simple and very much to our point. "Agitation and mutability are inherent in the nature of democratic republics." Political wisdom changes overnight as Americans change their president every four years and their legislature every two years. If religion were to throw itself into this fray, "where could it take firm hold in the ebb and flow of human opinions? Where would be that respect which belongs to it, amid the struggles of faction? And what would become of its immortality, in the midst of universal decay?"
This quote, I definitely agree with. Religion or the belief of Religion and all of it's concepts at times solely lie on the man in charge when it comes to church and state issues. When people vote generally they do not look at if you are Baptist or catholic but what can you do that will help America's growth. Opinions get us in trouble not policy.
Before it was mail delivery on Sundays, or Catholic immigrants, or Darwinian biology in school curriculums. Whenever religion of any kind casts itself as the one true faith and starts trying to arrange public policy accordingly, people who believe that they have a stake in free institutions, whatever else might divide them politically, had better look out
This shows that people will find anything to argue about if they feel that it affects them in any kind of way. They use religion as a ground to stand on to say something is right or wrong especially when it comes to the subject of Abortion. This is really a personal issue that the person and God will have to deal with.
Her speech and demeanor were absolutely incredible. Very proud!
Of course he was proud. This is a man who sees nothing that he or his family every does as wrong. He probably read it first and said "Melania you can say this way better than Michelle and the people will love you, (even though you stole it )or there will be repercussions". Just a little humor
ensuing uproar would overshadow Melania Trump's introduction on the national stage
Carter was right earlier. It really did not hurt his election at all. She could have honestly dressed like the Michelle Obama and everything and at the end of the day it was still about Trump and not Melanie, his wife. They were going to vote him into office anyway.
remarkably similar to a passage from first lady Michelle Obama's speech
I also remember this as well. the fact that Melania thought that she could use Michelle Obama's words baffles me. She stood there with so much conviction that I actually believe that she truly thought she wrote the speech
Melania Trump: "Make Plagiarism Great Again!"— TimothyJonathanWalsh (@HereComesTim) July 19, 2016
Right Tim, lol. that is what Trump's whole campaign was centered around..making something "Great Again". He may not have plagiarized but I'm sure people are figuring out now that he did definitely lied about a few things.
an observer on Twitter noted that a small portion of her remarks was remarkably similar to a passage from first lady Michelle Obama's speech
I believe that what Melania attempted to do was paraphrase. The problem here is that she just switched out a word or 2 but really said exactly the same thing.
The founders were believers who often talked about the importance of God and morality in public life.
I agree that his was the foal point when this land/country was initially founded. It's unfortunate though because I really don't mind if a person practices their faith in school, It doesn't affect others unless they want it to e honest. People can complain about something and the next thing you know the average man is writing legislature for all to live by. Taking religion and pledge of allegiance , I believe has turned this country into something of privilege and not of opportunity.
That religious values are supposed to be at the center of everything in our country.
It can only be the center if everyone abided by what God stood for in the beginning. He is the resurrection and the light. He died on the cross so that we all could have great lives but instead we spend a great deal of time stabbing each other in the back. The country has really become one in which things are only important if it affects us directly.
And all it's done is give the secular world, who doesn't profess to believe in anything, the right to say, just because I don't want to hear it, you can't say it.
Who determines who the secular world is? To me, this is just a way to blame someone for church not being allowed in schools. The crazy part is that a great deal of Christians can also be considered as having secular ways in their daily lives but they hide it so that no one knows that they have non-Christian like ways of living themselves.
a young girl was looking forward to her high school graduation and having the opportunity to sing. But when she chose the song that she wanted to sing at her graduation, just because it had the mere reference to God in the song, she was removed from the program.
I believe that this was wrong due to her reasoning most likely being that she loved the song and could probably sing it very well. Not because it dealt with God and the possibility of offending people. This is a situation that has gone to far.
voted yes to the federal money, but he added wording saying that the Salvation Army couldn't use the facility to hold prayer services or proselytize because of the separation of church and state
my thoughts are that they should not have taken money if there were going to be stipulations behind it. The people who this money was intended for, usually are seeking some form of spiritual guidance at the end of the day.