Dictionari

A||B||C||D||E||F||G||H||I||J||K||L||M||N||O||P||Q||R||S||T||U||V||W||X||Y||Z

NikeAirJordanRetroFemme


etc. until Tevye shouts that there is no other hand and starts stomping around and going on about traditionAnyhow even potential anti-wavists were bored enough by this point on Saturday to provide video of the waves in question There were at least nine full-bore attempts with several of the efforts meeting any fair definition of successThat fan wave just went around the Nats stadium 6 consecutive times… ?? Tyler Dunmyer (@TylerDunmyer) It only took 9 innings to get the whole stadium to do the wave at the Nats game. That’s great! passionate bout of uncut information. and I think on the Web so far, We regret the error. Superman is DC Comics and Warner Bros. and they do things differently And when DC Entertainment tried to be Marvel on film we were given "Green Lantern" which was a huge letdown for most comic-book fans (excepting Mark Strongs fine performance as Sinestro)Can powerful forces keep Henry Cavills Superman down(Clay Enos - via AP)There also seems to be some critics who cant let go of Christopher Reeve and Richard Donner Hey you want to see a tribute to Donner Go watch "Superman Returns" a movie that made no attempt to define a Superman for a new generation insteading holding on to the past with a Reeve look-alike (in Brandon Routh) who barely threw a punchHenryCavill(Clay Enos - via AP)So what are the fanboys saying about "Man of Steel" Well its scoring on such sites as (which gave the film an "A") and Modern Myth Media Myself Im siding with the fanboysHenry Cavill is Superman He is utterly convincing as the Man of Steel Michael Shannon as Zod Heath Ledger will always be the gold standard for comic-book movie villains but Shannons Zod is memorable and intimidating There is a method to Zods madness He Kevin Costner (as Jonathan Kent) and Diane Lane (as Martha Kent) in "Man of Steel" (Clay Enos - via AP)fights for the survival of his people no matter the cost Is Zod ruthless No Hes just a general looking to complete his mission And for ruthless look no farther than Zods right-hand woman Faora-Ul (Antje Traue) who at times throws Superman around like a rag doll (and boy is that fun to watch)We get an extended look at Krypton and the family of El We get to watch Clark Kents journey as he discovers who he is and who hes meant to be as well and we bask in his small-town Kansas roots The film deftly depicts the Kents (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane) who provide the care needed to make someone so powerful so compassionate Henry Cavills Superman with Amy Adamss journalistically dogged Pulitzer-winning Lois Lane (Courtesy of Warner Bros Picture - )As Lois Lane Amy Adams falls in the air a few (too many) times but shes helpful to Superman when he really needs it All backed by a strong Hans Zimmer scoreThen theres the action Im not a spoiler to say it comes down to Superman vs Zod The battle is comic-book heaven writ large and loudDo I eagerly await a sequel YesIs Cavill the man I want leading the Justice League No doubtDid the combination of Zack Snyders vision David Goyers words and Christopher Nolans guidance give me the Superman movie I wanted Absolutely Do critical response bother me Maybe Many fanboys will never admit it but deep down many of us want the critics to like superhero movies as much as we do It justifies our devotion Then again I didnt go into "Man of Steel" expecting it to be "The Winters Bone" I wanted a Superman that had to clench his fist against an equally strong foe Just like in the comics And thats what I got Is "Man of Steel" perfect No Is it better than "The Dark Knight" No but really: What is ""Man of Steel" is the Superman that film fanboys deserve and people dont follow how I point my thumb. in a statement Jan 14Kremer issued that statement after President Obama argued that if Congress did not raise the debt limit the United States would not be able to pay for services rendered in the past: "If congressional Republicans refuse to pay Americas bills on time Social Security checks and veterans benefits will be delayed" Obama said "We might not be able to pay our troops or honor our contracts with small business owners"This is an interesting question which before the last debt limit showdown in 2011 Then we examined whether Social Security benefits could still be paid even if the debt ceiling was breached; the answer was a bit inconclusive But after that last crisis the Treasury Departments inspector general provided Congress with at the options the administration had considered for such a crisisMoreover Kremer has upped the ante by saying the government could pay not only Social Security benefits but also Medicare and the military three of the biggest parts of the budget as well as interest payments on the debt Lets examine whether her claim is credibleThe FactsThis years debt ceiling showdown is exacerbated by the fact that February is just about the worst month in terms of government finances because relatively little money is collected while lots of bills must be paid including income-tax refunds Both the and the say that there is tremendous legal uncertainty about whether some payments could be honored while others ignored if the nation goes about the borrowing limit The Treasury believes that Congress has never given direction about which payments should receive priority; others (such as the Government Accountability office in 1985) have concluded there is no requirement that Treasury must pay bills in the order in which they are received This is a bit of an academic dispute The sheer volume of transactions as many as 5 million a day would make it difficult to pick and choose Moreover Treasury says its systems are designed to make payments in the order in which they are dueAfter the 2011 showdown Treasury concluded that "the least harmful option available to the country at the time of these very bad options" was a delayed payment regime In other words Treasury would only pay all of the bills for a particular day once it had collected enough cash for every outstanding claim due that day So in theory Mondays payments would be held until say Wednesday Then Tuesdays payments would be held until enough money was collected for that days payments which could be Thursday or Friday So the government could start the following week already three days behind in payments and continue to fall ever farther back Taylor Budowich a spokesman for the Tea Party Express defended Kremers statement pointing us to by the Bipartisan Policy Center which he said included "some options" for spending priorities"It is unadvisable to get into a situation where we must prioritize spending but it is irresponsible and absolutely unacceptable to continue down a path of increased debt increased spending and increased taxes" Budowich saidWe looked at the Bipartisan Policy Center report and actually found that it completely undercut Kremers statement We also double-checked with a co-author of the report and a former staff director of the Senate Budget Committee under Sen Pete V Domenici (R-NM) He agreed that Kremers statement was incorrect "You dont have to be an MIT mathematician to figure this out" Bell said "As a matter of math the tea party person is wrong" On a given day he said payments for Social Security Medicare active-duty soldiers and interest on the debt would add up to $53 billion while the government would have only collected $20 billion Bell also agreed that as a practical matter it was all but impossible for Treasury to pay a defense contractor ahead of a Social Security recipient or vice versaHeres an example of cash-flow problem as illustrated by the Bipartisan Policy Center:The Bipartisan Policy Center in its report also provides a few illustrative examples such as Treasury not paying any income tax refunds in order to pay higher-priority bills first But it says none of the options are practical and would be difficult to maintain for a period of timeThe Pinocchio TestKremer used pretty strong language "baloney" to condemn Obamas statement but the evidence provided by the Tea Party Express actually supports the presidents point By available evidence it appears all but impossible for the Treasury Department to pick and choose among payments or to keep up that balancing act up for very longFour Pinocchios()UPDATE: Taylor Budowich the Tea Party Express spokesman took issue with our analysis and asked to provide a further response We are happy to oblige especially because the Tea Party Express now appears to acknowledge the need for at least a temporary increase in the debt ceiling to get past the months of February and March But we see no reason to alter or amend our ruling on Kremers initial statement "Our statement was challenging the fundamental point made by President Obama that we had to PERMANENTLY increase the debt ceiling as he requested or we would not be able to pay for our military debt Social Security and other government programs What the President said was incorrect and we called him on it"We appreciate and agree that government income fluctuates some days ending in a surplus and others a deficit There are cash flow issues that might necessitate a temporary debt ceiling increase which would then be reduced when tax revenues balloon in March and April We are not opposed to responsibly meeting essential obligations We are correct in pointing out that it is just scare tactics by Obama and not accurate for him to claim that military debt obligations and Social Security might be jeopardized"Even when taking into account the cash flow straw man you created to dispute our essential premise there is plenty of evidence that limiting spending could be successful If you consider an entire month (similar to the analysis on pages 24-28 of the Bipartisan Policy Center) we can pay Interest on Debt ($381B) Medicare/Medicaid ($725B) Social Security Benefits ($611B) Military Pay and Retirement ($132B) and Veterans Benefits ($42B)with $879 Billion left over"That alone should suffice as support for our statement While some days we may have deficits and others surpluses we can easily place a temporary increase in the borrowing (debt) limit for Tuesday knowing it will be paid for on Wednesday Put more generally we can cover the prioritized bills in a way that ends each month with the same debt burden while accepting there are moderate debt fluctuations from day to day"Mr Bell was right it does not take an MIT mathematician to figure this out and this statement should not have resulted in ANY Pinocchios If you want to disagree with our tactics and ideology that is fine but the facts are on our side You cant take the cash flow argument from Mr Bell and use that to prove that we cant meet our major obligations I hope you will print a retraction"Check out our candidate Follow The Fact Checker on and friend us on The Lockhorns. They said: We have fuzzy bears with a pink ribbon for women and a blue ribbon for men.

etc. until Tevye shouts that there is no other hand and starts stomping around and going on about traditionAnyhow even potential anti-wavists were bored enough by this point on Saturday to provide video of the waves in question There were at least nine full-bore attempts with several of the efforts meeting any fair definition of successThat fan wave just went around the Nats stadium 6 consecutive times… ?? Tyler Dunmyer (@TylerDunmyer) It only took 9 innings to get the whole stadium to do the wave at the Nats game. That’s great! passionate bout of uncut information. and I think on the Web so far, We regret the error. Superman is DC Comics and Warner Bros. and they do things differently And when DC Entertainment tried to be Marvel on film we were given "Green Lantern" which was a huge letdown for most comic-book fans (excepting Mark Strongs fine performance as Sinestro)Can powerful forces keep Henry Cavills Superman down(Clay Enos - via AP)There also seems to be some critics who cant let go of Christopher Reeve and Richard Donner Hey you want to see a tribute to Donner Go watch "Superman Returns" a movie that made no attempt to define a Superman for a new generation insteading holding on to the past with a Reeve look-alike (in Brandon Routh) who barely threw a punchHenryCavill(Clay Enos - via AP)So what are the fanboys saying about "Man of Steel" Well its scoring on such sites as (which gave the film an "A") and Modern Myth Media Myself Im siding with the fanboysHenry Cavill is Superman He is utterly convincing as the Man of Steel Michael Shannon as Zod Heath Ledger will always be the gold standard for comic-book movie villains but Shannons Zod is memorable and intimidating There is a method to Zods madness He Kevin Costner (as Jonathan Kent) and Diane Lane (as Martha Kent) in "Man of Steel" (Clay Enos - via AP)fights for the survival of his people no matter the cost Is Zod ruthless No Hes just a general looking to complete his mission And for ruthless look no farther than Zods right-hand woman Faora-Ul (Antje Traue) who at times throws Superman around like a rag doll (and boy is that fun to watch)We get an extended look at Krypton and the family of El We get to watch Clark Kents journey as he discovers who he is and who hes meant to be as well and we bask in his small-town Kansas roots The film deftly depicts the Kents (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane) who provide the care needed to make someone so powerful so compassionate Henry Cavills Superman with Amy Adamss journalistically dogged Pulitzer-winning Lois Lane (Courtesy of Warner Bros Picture - )As Lois Lane Amy Adams falls in the air a few (too many) times but shes helpful to Superman when he really needs it All backed by a strong Hans Zimmer scoreThen theres the action Im not a spoiler to say it comes down to Superman vs Zod The battle is comic-book heaven writ large and loudDo I eagerly await a sequel YesIs Cavill the man I want leading the Justice League No doubtDid the combination of Zack Snyders vision David Goyers words and Christopher Nolans guidance give me the Superman movie I wanted Absolutely Do critical response bother me Maybe Many fanboys will never admit it but deep down many of us want the critics to like superhero movies as much as we do It justifies our devotion Then again I didnt go into "Man of Steel" expecting it to be "The Winters Bone" I wanted a Superman that had to clench his fist against an equally strong foe Just like in the comics And thats what I got Is "Man of Steel" perfect No Is it better than "The Dark Knight" No but really: What is ""Man of Steel" is the Superman that film fanboys deserve and people dont follow how I point my thumb. in a statement Jan 14Kremer issued that statement after President Obama argued that if Congress did not raise the debt limit the United States would not be able to pay for services rendered in the past: "If congressional Republicans refuse to pay Americas bills on time Social Security checks and veterans benefits will be delayed" Obama said "We might not be able to pay our troops or honor our contracts with small business owners"This is an interesting question which before the last debt limit showdown in 2011 Then we examined whether Social Security benefits could still be paid even if the debt ceiling was breached; the answer was a bit inconclusive But after that last crisis the Treasury Departments inspector general provided Congress with at the options the administration had considered for such a crisisMoreover Kremer has upped the ante by saying the government could pay not only Social Security benefits but also Medicare and the military three of the biggest parts of the budget as well as interest payments on the debt Lets examine whether her claim is credibleThe FactsThis years debt ceiling showdown is exacerbated by the fact that February is just about the worst month in terms of government finances because relatively little money is collected while lots of bills must be paid including income-tax refunds Both the and the say that there is tremendous legal uncertainty about whether some payments could be honored while others ignored if the nation goes about the borrowing limit The Treasury believes that Congress has never given direction about which payments should receive priority; others (such as the Government Accountability office in 1985) have concluded there is no requirement that Treasury must pay bills in the order in which they are received This is a bit of an academic dispute The sheer volume of transactions as many as 5 million a day would make it difficult to pick and choose Moreover Treasury says its systems are designed to make payments in the order in which they are dueAfter the 2011 showdown Treasury concluded that "the least harmful option available to the country at the time of these very bad options" was a delayed payment regime In other words Treasury would only pay all of the bills for a particular day once it had collected enough cash for every outstanding claim due that day So in theory Mondays payments would be held until say Wednesday Then Tuesdays payments would be held until enough money was collected for that days payments which could be Thursday or Friday So the government could start the following week already three days behind in payments and continue to fall ever farther back Taylor Budowich a spokesman for the Tea Party Express defended Kremers statement pointing us to by the Bipartisan Policy Center which he said included "some options" for spending priorities"It is unadvisable to get into a situation where we must prioritize spending but it is irresponsible and absolutely unacceptable to continue down a path of increased debt increased spending and increased taxes" Budowich saidWe looked at the Bipartisan Policy Center report and actually found that it completely undercut Kremers statement We also double-checked with a co-author of the report and a former staff director of the Senate Budget Committee under Sen Pete V Domenici (R-NM) He agreed that Kremers statement was incorrect "You dont have to be an MIT mathematician to figure this out" Bell said "As a matter of math the tea party person is wrong" On a given day he said payments for Social Security Medicare active-duty soldiers and interest on the debt would add up to $53 billion while the government would have only collected $20 billion Bell also agreed that as a practical matter it was all but impossible for Treasury to pay a defense contractor ahead of a Social Security recipient or vice versaHeres an example of cash-flow problem as illustrated by the Bipartisan Policy Center:The Bipartisan Policy Center in its report also provides a few illustrative examples such as Treasury not paying any income tax refunds in order to pay higher-priority bills first But it says none of the options are practical and would be difficult to maintain for a period of timeThe Pinocchio TestKremer used pretty strong language "baloney" to condemn Obamas statement but the evidence provided by the Tea Party Express actually supports the presidents point By available evidence it appears all but impossible for the Treasury Department to pick and choose among payments or to keep up that balancing act up for very longFour Pinocchios()UPDATE: Taylor Budowich the Tea Party Express spokesman took issue with our analysis and asked to provide a further response We are happy to oblige especially because the Tea Party Express now appears to acknowledge the need for at least a temporary increase in the debt ceiling to get past the months of February and March But we see no reason to alter or amend our ruling on Kremers initial statement "Our statement was challenging the fundamental point made by President Obama that we had to PERMANENTLY increase the debt ceiling as he requested or we would not be able to pay for our military debt Social Security and other government programs What the President said was incorrect and we called him on it"We appreciate and agree that government income fluctuates some days ending in a surplus and others a deficit There are cash flow issues that might necessitate a temporary debt ceiling increase which would then be reduced when tax revenues balloon in March and April We are not opposed to responsibly meeting essential obligations We are correct in pointing out that it is just scare tactics by Obama and not accurate for him to claim that military debt obligations and Social Security might be jeopardized"Even when taking into account the cash flow straw man you created to dispute our essential premise there is plenty of evidence that limiting spending could be successful If you consider an entire month (similar to the analysis on pages 24-28 of the Bipartisan Policy Center) we can pay Interest on Debt ($381B) Medicare/Medicaid ($725B) Social Security Benefits ($611B) Military Pay and Retirement ($132B) and Veterans Benefits ($42B)with $879 Billion left over"That alone should suffice as support for our statement While some days we may have deficits and others surpluses we can easily place a temporary increase in the borrowing (debt) limit for Tuesday knowing it will be paid for on Wednesday Put more generally we can cover the prioritized bills in a way that ends each month with the same debt burden while accepting there are moderate debt fluctuations from day to day"Mr Bell was right it does not take an MIT mathematician to figure this out and this statement should not have resulted in ANY Pinocchios If you want to disagree with our tactics and ideology that is fine but the facts are on our side You cant take the cash flow argument from Mr Bell and use that to prove that we cant meet our major obligations I hope you will print a retraction"Check out our candidate Follow The Fact Checker on and friend us on The Lockhorns. They said: We have fuzzy bears with a pink ribbon for women and a blue ribbon for men.